Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Hanumantha Mogaveera, filed two criminal petitions under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking bail in Crime Nos.14/2019 and 16/2019 registered at Udupi Women Police Station. The offences alleged included rape under Section 376(1) and 376(3) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, sexual harassment under Section 354(A), and various provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The victim, a minor, initially stated in her complaint that she was 16 years old and that the accused had committed rape on multiple occasions. However, in her statement under Section 164 CrPC, she claimed she was 17 years old and that the accused had only attempted to commit rape. The court noted that the victim's statements were inconsistent regarding her age and the nature of the assault. The prosecution opposed bail, arguing that the victim was a minor and the offences were serious. The court, after examining the materials, found that there was no prima facie case against the accused due to the contradictions. The court held that the accused was entitled to bail and allowed both petitions, directing the accused to be released on bail subject to conditions.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Bail - Prima Facie Case - Inconsistent Statements - Section 439 CrPC, Sections 376(1), 354(A) IPC, Sections 5, 6, 21(2) POCSO Act, Sections 3(1)(w)(i)(ii), 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va) SC/ST Act - The court considered bail applications where the victim's statements under Sections 161 and 164 CrPC were contradictory regarding the age of the victim and the occurrence of sexual assault. Held that when there is no prima facie case and the victim's statements are inconsistent, bail may be granted (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the accused is entitled to bail under Section 439 CrPC in cases involving offences under POCSO Act and SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, given the inconsistencies in the victim's statements and the absence of a prima facie case.
Final Decision
Both criminal petitions are allowed. The petitioner shall be released on bail in Crime Nos.14/2019 and 16/2019 on executing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety, subject to conditions including not tampering with evidence and appearing before the court as required.
Law Points
- Bail
- Prima Facie Case
- Inconsistent Statements
- POCSO Act
- SC/ST Act
- Section 439 CrPC
