Pratap @ Bestha Prathap vs State Of Karnataka on 19 May, 2026

    0
    28
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Karnataka High Court

    Pratap @ Bestha Prathap vs State Of Karnataka on 19 May, 2026

                                                      -1-
                                                                NC: 2026:KHC:24800
                                                            CRL.P No. 2291 of 2026
    
    
                       HC-KAR
    
    
    
                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
    
                                 DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF MAY, 2026
    
                                                 BEFORE
    
                                 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
    
                            CRIMINAL PETITION No. 2291 OF 2026 (439(Cr.PC) /
                                               483(BNSS))
                       BETWEEN:
    
                       1.     PRATAP @ BESTHA PRATHAP,
                              S/O BESTHA SURESH,
                              AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS,
                              RESIDING AT 2-22, B COLONY,
                              T. VEERAPURAM, RAYADURGA ,
                              MANDALAM ANANTAPUR,
                              ANDRA PRADESH 515865.
                                                                     ...PETITIONER
                       (BY SRI GIRISH R., ADVOCATE)
    
    
                       AND:
    
    Digitally signed
    by VINUTHA B       1.     STATE OF KARNATAKA,
    S                         BY KENGERI PS,
    Location: High
    Court of                  NOW REPRESENTED BY
    Karnataka                 STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
                              HIGH COURT BUILDING,
                              BENGALURU 560001
    
                       2.     SMT. KAVITHA,
                              W/O PRADEEP
                              AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
                              R/AT No.30, 1ST MAIN,
                              9TH CROSS,
                              HARSHA LAYOUT,
                              KENGERI,
                                    -2-
                                                   NC: 2026:KHC:24800
                                              CRL.P No. 2291 of 2026
    
    
     HC-KAR
    
    
    
         BENGALURU 560060
         (MOTHER OF VICTIM GIRL)
                                                      ...RESPONDENTS
    (BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP FOR R1;
    NOTICE RO R2 SERVED)
         THIS CRL.P. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 (FILED
    U/S.483 BNSS) CR.P.C. PRAYING TO GRANTING REGULAR BAIL
    THEREBY DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT KENGERI P.S., TO
    RELEASE THE PETITIONER IN SPL.C.No.2792/2025 IN
    CR.No.434/2025 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE
    ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC V BENGALURU
    FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S 127(4),87,64(2)(m) OF BNS
    AND SECTION 6 OF POCSO ACT.
    
        THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
    ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
    
    CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
    
                               ORAL ORDER

    Heard Sri R. Girish, learned counsel appearing for the

    petitioner, and Smt. Rashmi Patel, learned High Court

    SPONSORED

    Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

    2. This petition is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya

    Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), by the accused

    seeking grant of bail in Crime No.434/2025 dated 09.09.2025

    registered by Kengeri Police Station, Bengaluru City, initially for

    the offence punishable under Section 137(2) of the Bharatiya

    Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and subsequently for the offences
    -3-
    NC: 2026:KHC:24800
    CRL.P No. 2291 of 2026

    HC-KAR

    punishable under Sections 127(4), 87 and 64(2)(m) of the BNS

    and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual

    Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), presently pending on the file

    of the Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, FTSC-V,

    Bengaluru, in Special C.C. No.2792/2025.

    3. The facts, in brief, are that a complaint came to be lodged

    by respondent No.2 stating that the minor victim was found

    missing from the house and that the victim had sent a message

    to the mobile phone of one of her relatives stating that she had

    gone along with the accused. The same was also found

    reflected in the CCTV footage. Pursuant to the registration of

    the FIR and during the course of investigation, the petitioner

    came to be arrested on 16.10.2025 and, upon being produced

    before the jurisdictional Court, was remanded to judicial

    custody, and continues in custody till date.

    3.1 The application filed by the petitioner under Section 483

    of the BNSS before the Sessions Court came to be rejected by

    order dated 02.02.2026. After completion of the investigation,

    the respondent-police have filed the charge sheet against the

    petitioner arraying him as accused No.1.
    -4-

    NC: 2026:KHC:24800
    CRL.P No. 2291 of 2026

    HC-KAR

    4. Sri R. Girish, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner,

    submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the

    case and that, even after completion of the investigation, no

    reliable material has been collected to establish the

    involvement of the petitioner in the alleged incident. It is

    further submitted that there is no acceptable material to

    establish the age of the victim so as to attract the provisions of

    the POCSO Act.

    4.1 Learned counsel further submits that the case of the

    prosecution is founded solely on the statement of the victim

    and that there is no medical, scientific or any other

    corroborative evidence in support of the allegations. It is also

    contended that the Study/Conduct Certificate issued by the

    Headmaster of the school for the purpose of determining the

    age of the victim is not reliable. Learned counsel further

    submits that the FSL report dated 11.11.2025 does not support

    the case of the prosecution with regard to the alleged act.

    5. Though notice has been served on respondent No.2, there

    is no representation on behalf of respondent No.2.
    -5-

    NC: 2026:KHC:24800
    CRL.P No. 2291 of 2026

    HC-KAR

    6. Smt. Rashmi Patel, learned High Court Government

    Pleader appearing for respondent No.1, submits that there is

    sufficient material collected during the course of investigation

    and placed along with the charge sheet to establish the

    involvement of the petitioner in the alleged crime. It is

    submitted that prima facie material is available to show that

    the victim was a minor at the relevant point of time.

    6.1 Learned High Court Government Pleader further submits

    that the offences alleged against the petitioner are serious in

    nature and that, if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there is

    every likelihood of his threatening the victim and influencing

    the prosecution witnesses. It is also submitted that the social

    standing and status of the victim may be adversely affected.

    7. Having considered the submissions made by the learned

    counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court

    Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1, it is

    evident that the alleged incident is stated to have taken place

    on 28.08.2025, whereas the complaint came to be lodged on

    09.09.2025, after a delay of 12 days. The age of the victim,

    even as reflected in the Study Certificate, is shown as 17 years,
    -6-
    NC: 2026:KHC:24800
    CRL.P No. 2291 of 2026

    HC-KAR

    8 months and 27 days as on the date of the alleged incident. At

    this stage, there appears to be no unimpeachable material

    placed on record to conclusively establish the age of the victim.

    8. Furthermore, the respondent-police, after completion of

    the investigation, have filed the charge sheet. The FSL report

    dated 11.11.2025, pertaining to the examination of seminal

    stains, indicates negative results with regard to the presence of

    seminal stains on the articles subjected to examination. Apart

    from the same, there is no other medical evidence prima facie

    indicating the occurrence of the alleged incident.

    9. When prima facie material to establish the alleged

    incident is not forthcoming and the material accompanying the

    charge sheet also supports such a view, continued judicial

    custody of the petitioner would adversely affect his personal

    liberty. The apprehension expressed by the prosecution that, if

    enlarged on bail, the petitioner may threaten the victim or

    influence the witnesses can be adequately safeguarded by

    imposing stringent conditions.

    -7-

    NC: 2026:KHC:24800
    CRL.P No. 2291 of 2026

    HC-KAR

    10. In the light of the above discussion, and without

    expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is

    of the view that further custodial incarceration of the petitioner

    is not warranted, particularly when the investigation has been

    completed and the charge sheet has already been filed.

    Accordingly, the following order:

    ORDER

    (i) The Criminal Petition is allowed.

    (ii) The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in
    Crime No.434/2025 registered by Kengeri Police
    Station, Bengaluru City, initially for the offence
    punishable under Section 137(2) of the Bharatiya
    Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and subsequently for
    the offences punishable under Sections 127(4), 87
    and 64(2)(m) of the BNS and Section 6 of the
    Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act,
    2012 (POCSO Act), subject to the following
    conditions:

    (a) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a
    sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with
    two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of
    the jurisdictional Court;

    -8-

    NC: 2026:KHC:24800
    CRL.P No. 2291 of 2026

    HC-KAR

    (b) The petitioner shall appear regularly before the Trial
    Court on all dates of hearing;

    (c) The petitioner shall not, either directly or indirectly,
    threaten, or tamper with the prosecution witnesses;

    (d) The petitioner shall not involve himself in any
    offence in future.

    (e) The petitioner shall not attempt to meet the victim
    girl or establish any contact with the family
    members of the victim.

    (f) In the event of any violation of the aforesaid
    conditions, the prosecution is at liberty to seek
    cancellation of bail in accordance with law.

    Sd/-

    (K. V. ARAVIND)
    JUDGE

    VBS
    List No.: 1 Sl No.: 74



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here