NDPS | Mentioning FIR Number On Memos Before Registration Makes the Entire Recovery Suspect: Himachal Pradesh High Court MACT | Once Deceased Is Proven To Be Skilled Worker, Deputy Commissioner's Wage Notification Is Applicable: P&H HC Bank’s Technical Excuses Can’t Override Employee’s Right to Ex Gratia Under Old Circulars: Bombay High Court Slams Canara Bank’s Rejection of Claim Once Worker Files Affidavit of Unemployment, Burden Shifts to Employer to Prove Gainful Employment: Delhi High Court Grants 17B Relief Despite 12-Year Delay Specific Relief Act | Readiness and Willingness Must Be Real and Continuous — Plaintiffs Cannot Withhold Funds and Blame the Seller: Bombay High Court Even If Claim Is Styled Under Section 163A, It Can Be Treated Under Section 166 If Negligence Is Pleaded And Higher Compensation Is Claimed: Supreme Court When Cheating Flows from One Criminal Conspiracy, the Law Does Not Demand 1852 FIRs: Supreme Court Upholds Single FIR in Multi-Crore Cheating Case Initiating Multiple FIRs on Same Facts is Impermissible: Supreme Court Quashes Parallel FIRs and Grants Bail Protection in Refund Case Limitation Act | Quasi-Judicial Bodies Cannot Invoke Section 5 Principles Without Express Statutory Grant: Supreme Court Arbitration Act | Commencement of Proceedings Triggered by Notice Receipt, Not Section 11 Filing: Supreme Court Strong and Cogent Evidence Must Exist at the Threshold to Deny Bail Under Section 319 CrPC: Supreme Court Appellate Court Under Section 37 Cannot Sit in Appeal Over Arbitral Award on Merits: Supreme Court Affidavit Ratifying Power of Attorney Cannot Be Disowned Later: Supreme Court Orders Specific Performance Despite Earlier Revocation Claims No Law Empowers a Corporation to Haunt a Retiree: Supreme Court Quashes Post-Retirement Disciplinary Action for Want of Jurisdiction Mere Expectation of Higher Bids Can't Justify Cancelling a Valid Auction: Supreme Court Quashes GDA’s Arbitrary Rejection of Highest Bidder Prolonged Incarceration Without Trial Violates Article 21, Even in Grave Economic Offences: Supreme Court Grants Bail to Arvind Dham in ₹673 Crore PMLA Case Article 14 | ‘Rules of the Game Cannot Be Changed Midstream’: Supreme Court Quashes Punjab’s Modified Sports Quota Policy for MBBS Admissions Rules of the Game Cannot Be Changed Midway: Supreme Court Quashes Bihar’s Retrospective Recruitment Amendment "Imaginary Ghost" - Court Permits Karthigai Deepam at Thiruparankundram ‘Deepathoon’: Madras High Court 353 IPC | Continuing Prosecution Against Citizens Despite Statutory Findings of Police Atrocities Is Abuse of Process: Kerala High Court Court Cannot Compel Plaintiff to Continue Suit Where No Liberty to File Fresh Suit is Sought: Bombay High Court Claim for Demurrage is Not a Crystallized Debt—Only an Unadjudicated Right to Sue: Andhra Pradesh High Court Declared Foreign Nationals Have No Right to Reside in India: Gauhati High Court Upholds Expulsion of Bangladeshi Woman Without Requiring Deportation Protocols

Prima Facie Evidence of a Loving Relationship: High Court Grants Bail to Accused in POCSO Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent legal development, the High Court of Karnataka has granted bail to the petitioner accused in a case involving a mix of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act offences. The decision comes after a detailed examination of the case, and the court cited “prima facie evidence of a loving relationship” between the accused and the victim.

The case in question, Special Criminal Pocso No. 114 of 2023, pertains to an incident registered by the Chitradurga Women Police Station, Chitradurga District, under Sections 363, 376(2)(n) of IPC, Sections 4, 5(J)(II), 5(L), 6, 17 of the POCSO Act, and Sections 9, 10, and 11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act. The accused, identified as Sri. G. Venu, had sought regular bail after his earlier application was rejected.

The court, presided over by the Hon’ble Mr. Justice S Vishwajith Shetty, heard arguments from both sides. The complainant, who is the mother of the victim girl, had lodged the complaint in July 2023. During the investigation, the petitioner and the victim girl were located, and the petitioner was remanded to judicial custody. The victim girl’s statement was recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which forms a crucial part of the evidence in this case.

The petitioner’s counsel argued that the evidence on record indicated a loving relationship between the petitioner and the victim girl, and it was at the victim’s insistence that the petitioner had taken her to his relative’s house. The victim girl had not made any serious allegations against the petitioner, further supporting the petitioner’s plea for bail.

In response, the High Court Government Pleader opposed the bail application, while the complainant remained absent during the hearing.

Justice S Vishwajith Shetty, in his observation, noted, “The material on record would go to show that the victim girl has not made any serious allegations against the petitioner. On the other hand, she has stated that after she attains 18 years of age, she intends to marry the petitioner.”

The judge also highlighted that the petitioner had no criminal antecedents and had been in custody since July 27, 2023. With the investigation completed and the charge sheet filed, the court found that the petitioner had made out a prima facie case for the grant of regular bail.

As a result, the court ordered, “The Criminal Petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Spl.C.Pocso No.114 of 2023 pending before the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga, subject to certain conditions, including execution of a personal bond.”

Date of Decision: 4th December 2023

SRI. G. VENU VS STATE BY CHITRADURGA WOMEN POLICE STATION

Latest Legal News