Sri Puttaswamy vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 April, 2015

Karnataka High Court

Sri Puttaswamy vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 April, 2015
Author: A.V.Chandrashekara
1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2015
BEFORE
HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.CHANDRASHEKARA
CRL.P NO.2057 OF 2015
BETWEEN :
SRI.PUTTASWAMY
S/O.SUBBEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
R/AT, DEVARAMUDDANAHALLY VILLAGE
HALLI MYSORE HOBLI
HOLENARASIPURA TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT - 34
.. PETITIONER
(BY SRI.PRADEEP K.C. - ADV.)
AND :
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY
HOLENARASIPURA RURAL POLICE STATION,
HASSAN DISTRICT
REP. BY ITS
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BANGALORE - 01
.. RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.B.J.ESHWARAPPA - HCGP )
THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO
ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN SPL.CASE NO.142/2014
ON THE FILE OF ADDL. S.J. HASSAN FOR THE OFFENCE
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 341, 363, 343, 366, 368, 376, 506 OF
IPC AND U/SS.4, 8 AND 12 OF POCSO ACT.
2

THIS CRL.P. COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE

COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/73955122/

Sri Puttaswamy vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 April, 2015

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate.
2. The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.242/2014 on the file of the Holenarasipura police
station for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 363, 343, 366, 368, 376, 506 of IPC and
u/ss.4, 8 and 12 of POCSO Act.
3. The allegation against this petitioner is that he abducted a girl aged about 17 years from her
village Devaramuddanahalli in Holenarasipura Tq. on 6.2.2014 and took her to various places,
confined her in a room in the vicinity of a brick kiln of Yelahanka in Bangalore and did not allow her
to contact her parents. It is further alleged that he forcibly married her threatening that it would be
very difficult for her father to perform the marriage of other daughters. Further he forcibly had
sexual intercourse with her several times as the result of which, the victim girl became pregnant. It
is further alleged that he had held out threats with dire consequence not to disclose to anybody.
3. The learned Govt. Pleader vehemently opposed grant of bail to the petitioner on the ground that
prima facie case is made out against the petitioner which is evidenced by the material collected by
the police in the form of final report with regard to the allegations made in the charge sheet and
further it is too premature to disbelieve the same and also the contents of the first information given
by the victim girl.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that now the victim girl has delivered a male baby
2 months ago and the petitioner would live with the victim girl and look after her as well her child
without fail. The learned counsel stated that he is making such submissions on receiving the
information from his client as well as his family members and further, as the entire investigation is
completed, requests that a lenient view may be taken against the petitioner and release him on bail.
5. There is some force in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. That apart, the
petitioner is a permanent resident of Devaramuddanahalli in Holenarasipura Tq. in Hassan Dist.
having deep roots in the community. Hence, the apprehension of the learned Govt. Pleader may be
met by imposing stringent conditions.
6. Hence, the following :ORDER The petition is allowed and bail is granted to the petitioner, subject to the following
conditions:a) Petitioner shall be released on bail on executing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with
one surety, for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned court.
b) Petitioner shall not tamper or attempt to tamper any of the prosecution witnesses.
Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/73955122/

Sri Puttaswamy vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 April, 2015

c) Petitioner shall not hold out threats to the prosecution witnesses or lure them in any manner.
d) Petitioner shall not involve in any criminal activities.
e) Petitioner shall attend the respondent police station once in a week i.e. on Sundays between 9.00
a.m. and 5 p.m. till the case against him is disposed of, after his release from the prison without fail.
f) It is made clear that if the petitioner violates any one of the conditions imposed on him, the
prosecution would be at liberty to seek for cancellation of bail from the concerned Special Court at
Hassan.
Sd/JUDGE rs

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/73955122/