High Court Grants Bail to Accused in POCSO Case Due to Lack of Prima Facie Evidence. Allegations of Sexual Assault of Minor Not Substantiated Against Accused No.1 Under Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 and Related IPC Offences.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU In Favour of Accused
  • 94
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Sri Rehabare Islam Parvez, accused No.1, filed a criminal petition under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking bail in Crime No.395/2019 registered by Koramangala Police Station, Bengaluru. The case was charge-sheeted for offences punishable under Sections 344, 307, 376, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The allegations were based on the complaint of CW.1. The court, after hearing the petitioner's counsel and the High Court Government Pleader, observed that the allegations against the petitioner did not make out a prima facie case for the offences charged. Consequently, the court allowed the petition and granted bail to the petitioner subject to conditions.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Bail - Section 439 CrPC - Prima Facie Case - Petitioner/accused No.1 sought bail in Crime No.395/2019 for offences under Sections 344, 307, 376, 506 r/w 34 IPC, Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 75 of Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 - Court held that allegations against accused No.1 did not make out a prima facie case for the offences charged, and he was entitled to bail - Held that bail granted subject to conditions (Paras 1-3).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioner/accused No.1 is entitled to bail under Section 439 CrPC for offences under IPC, POCSO Act, and Juvenile Justice Act.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Petition allowed. Petitioner/accused No.1 is granted bail subject to conditions.

Law Points

  • Bail
  • Prima Facie Case
  • Section 439 CrPC
  • POCSO Act
  • Juvenile Justice Act
  • IPC
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2020 LawText (KAR) (07) 112

Criminal Petition No.3043/2020

2020-07-07

K.S.Mudagal

Sri B.A.Belliappa (for petitioner), Sri R.D.Renukaradhya (HCGP for respondent)

Sri Rehabare Islam Parvez

State by Koramangala Police Station

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal bail petition under Section 439 CrPC

Remedy Sought

Enlargement of petitioner on bail in Spl.C.C. No.119/2020 (Crime No.395/2019)

Filing Reason

Petitioner is accused No.1 in a case for offences under IPC, POCSO Act, and Juvenile Justice Act

Issues

Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under Section 439 CrPC?

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner's counsel argued for bail HCGP opposed the bail

Ratio Decidendi

Allegations against the petitioner do not make out a prima facie case for the offences charged, hence he is entitled to bail under Section 439 CrPC.

Judgment Excerpts

Petitioner is accused No.1 and his wife is accused No.2 in Crime No.395/2019 of Koramangala police station. The case of the prosecution is based on complaint of CW.1. Allegations against the petitioner do not make out a prima facie case for the offences charged.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed a criminal petition under Section 439 CrPC seeking bail in Crime No.395/2019, which was charge-sheeted as Spl.C.C. No.119/2020. The petition was heard and disposed of on 07.07.2020.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 439
  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: 344, 307, 376, 506, 34
  • Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012: 4, 6
  • Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015: 75
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court Grants Bail to Accused in POCSO Case Due to Lack of Prima Facie Evidence. Allegations of Sexual Assault of Minor Not Substantiated Against Accused No.1 Under Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 and Related IPC Offences.
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Quashes Special Court Order in POCSO Case — Accused's Age Determination Requires Proper Inquiry Under Juvenile Justice Act. The court held that the Special Judge must conduct a preliminary inquiry under Section 7A of the Juv...