IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 7 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTiCE ANAND BYRAREDDY CRIMINAL PETITON No.10107/2011 BETWEEN: Shri Bharat Chandru Kamble, Age: 21 years, 0cc: Coolie, R/o. Ananthpur, Tal: Athani, Belgaum. . . . Petitioner (By Shri. Vitthal S. Teli, Advocate) AND: The State of Karnataka, Represented by the State Public Prosecutor, Through Athani Police Station, Athani, Belgaum. . . . Respondent (By Shri. Anand Kumar Navalgimath, Government Pleader) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking to grant a regular bail and the petitioner (accused No.1) be enlarged on bail in Athani P.S.Crime No.401/2010 pending on the file of the Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Athani, which is registered punishable under Sections 363, 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following: ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. The Government Pleader seeks time to file statement of objections. However, from a plain reading of the petition, the facts as narrated are: One Smt. Meenakshi B. Jadhav resident of Anantpur village of Athani Taluk, is a coolie by profession along with her husband and children. On 31.10.2010, it transpires that her elder daughter who was aged about 16 years was alone at home and the complainant had gone to the flour mill. When she returned home, she did not find her daughter, in spite of a search she was missing. Thereafter, she informed the said facts to the village elders and on suspicion of the petitioner’s involvement who is from the same village, and who was always teasing her daughter and trying to be intimate with her. It was further on suspicion that, since a cell phone recorded a call, having been made by Bharat Kamble to her daughter, she had gone to the house of Bharat Kamble and enquired with his parents of the whereabouts of the Bharat Kamble and about her suspicion that, he might have something to do with her daughter’s absence. She was squarely abused in foul language by the family of Kabmie turned away. It is only after the daughter Shridevi returned to the village, almost a fortnight later that the complainant thought it fit to lodge a case against the Bharat Kamble and his family of having kidnapped Shridevi and Bharat Kamble having had sex with her. Therefore, the Police had registered a case against this petitioner and his family. They had approached the Court below in the first instance, seeking bail. The Court has thought it fit to grant bail to other members of the family of Bharat Kamble while rejecting his bail application on the footing that the offence alleged against him is an offence punishable under Section 366A and therefore, a heinous offence traible by the Court of 4 Sessions and considering the gravity of offence, the Court has opined that it is not a fit case to enlarge him on bail. A mere reading of Section 366A, it is not the allegation of the complainant that Shridevi was induced and forced or seduced to have intercourse with a third person by Bharat Kamble. Hence, the very invocation of 366A appears to be out of place. In any event the delay in lodging the complaint and the absence ofmedical evidence of sexual violation and the fact of the said Shridevi being a minor would be matters for the trial. Therefore, to conclude that Bharat Kamble was in fact responsible for the alleged acts against Shridevi are not readily acceptable. Accordingly, the petitioner has made out a case for enlargement on bail. The petitioner shall be enlarged subject to the following conditions: 1) He shall furnish a personal bond for a sum of Z20,000/- with a solvent surety for a like sum, to the satisfaction ofthe trial Court. 5 0. 2) He shall make himself available to the Investigation Officer as and when required for the purposes ofinvestigation. 3) He shall not leave the jurisdiction ofthe trial Court without seeking leave ofthat Court. 4) He shall not seek to induce or threaten the prosecution witnesses. 5) He shall attend the trial Court on all dates of hearing without fail subject to the Court granting exemption for good and valid reason. 3d,.. JUDGE Rsh