CHANNABASAVASA CHENNAPPA vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10109
CRL.P No. 201231 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098212026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
TH
DATED THIS THE 24 DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.201231 OF 2026
(439(Cr.PC)/483(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
CHANNABASAVA CHENNAPPA S/O HANUMAYYA
KONDALAVAR, AGE:23 YEARS, OCC:DRIVER,
R/AT BHUMANAGUNDA VILLAGE, TQ. DEVADURGA,
DIST. RAICHUR-584 111.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. BASAVARAJ C. JAKA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH,
JALAHALLI POLICE STATION, TQ. DEVADURGA,
DIST. RAICHUR-584 111. NEW REPRESENTED
BY ADDL. SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH-585 107.
2. SMT. GANGAMMA W/O SHIVANNA,
AGE:38 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD,
R/AT BHUMANAGUNDA VILLAGE,
TQ. DEVADURGA, DIST. RAICHUR-584 111.
Digitally signed
by RENUKA
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SIDDALING P. PATIL, ADDL. SPP FOR R1,
R2 SERVED)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 483
OF THE BHARTIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, PRAYING
TO, ALLOW THIS PETITION AND ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10109
CRL.P No. 201231 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098212026
REGULAR BAIL IN SPL. CASE (POCSO) NO.249/2026, ARISING
OUT OF CASE REGISTERED IN CRIME NO.05/2026 AND FILED
CHARGE SHEET BY JALHALLI POLICE FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE U/SEC.137(2), 64 OF BNS 2023 AND SEC.4 AND 6
OF POCSO ACT., PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDL.
SESSIONS JUDGE RAICHUR, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY
ORAL ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
the learned Addl. SPP for the respondent/ State on the
petition. Perused the relevant materials on record.
2. This petition is filed by the petitioner/
accused under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘ BNSS ’), praying to
grant bail in his favour in the case in Spl.Case (POCSO)
No.249/2026 pending before the learned I Additional
District and Sessions Judge, Raichur arising out of
Crime No.05/2026 of the respondent Police for the
offences punishable under Sections 137(2) and 64 of
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’) and Sections
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10109
CRL.P No. 201231 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098212026
4 and 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences
Act, 2012 (for short ‘POCSO Act’).
3. The learned Addl. SPP has orally objected to
the petition submitting that the investigation is already
over and the charge sheet is filed. The alleged offence is
under Section 6 of POCSO Act, which is heinous offence
punishable with imprisonment for a minimum term of
20 years, which may extend to imprisonment for life
which means imprisonment for the remainder of the
person’s natural life. Mere fact that the investigation is
already over and the charge sheet is filed in the case
cannot be a ground to grant bail in favour of the
petitioner. If the statement of witnesses and victim and
the allegations made against the petitioner are
considered, it is clear that there is chance of petitioner
tampering with the prosecution witnesses and
hampering with the trial of the case if he is released on
bail. Absolutely, there is no special ground made out by
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10109
CRL.P No. 201231 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098212026
the petitioner to grant bail in his favour. Therefore, the
learned Addl. SPP has sought for rejection of the bail
petition.
4. The prosecution was set into motion against
the petitioner on the complaint of respondent No.2, who
is mother of the victim on 13.01.2026. The case alleged
th
against the petitioner is that the victim was studying 9
standard and she was aged about 14 years as on the
date of incident. On 12.01.2026 at about 07.30 p.m.,
when the complainant was preparing food in the
kitchen, the victim was outside the house. Thereafter at
about 08.00 p.m., when the complainant after
completion of her work came outside, the victim was not
found. Hence, she informed the same to her relatives
and they searched for the victim, but the victim was not
found. Further, the complainant having suspicion over
the petitioner who used to talk with the victim/her
daughter gave complaint to the respondent Police.
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10109
CRL.P No. 201231 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098212026
Thereafter, the victim was traced along with the
petitioner and the victim gave statement before the
respondent No.1 police that the petitioner took her away
under the promise of marrying her and thereafter had
repeatedly committed aggravated sexual assaults on the
victim. Based on the statement of the victim, the case
was registered against the petitioner. Hence, the
petitioner has committed the alleged offences.
5. The submission of the learned counsel for the
petitioner is that the petitioner is innocent of the
offences alleged and he has not committed any of such
offence. Per contra, the learned Addl. SPP for the
respondent submits that the investigation is completed
and the charge sheet is already filed against the
petitioner for the alleged offences. There is prima facie
case made out against the petitioner for having
committed the alleged offence, which is heinous in
nature. Therefore, at this stage, any of the contentions
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10109
CRL.P No. 201231 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098212026
of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the
petitioner is innocent of the offences alleged against him
does not merit consideration.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has
drawn attention of this Court to the statement made by
the victim under Section 183 of BNSS, wherein there are
no allegations against the petitioner regarding the
ingredients for the offence under Section 6 of POCSO
Act. However, the fact that the petitioner is aged 14
years and hence, she is ‘child’ within the meaning of
POCSO Act is not disputed. Further, the statement of
the victim given before the learned Magistrate clearly
shows that the petitioner took the victim from her
house, without informing her parents or lawful
guardian.
7. The submission of the learned counsel for the
petitioner that the victim voluntarily accompanied the
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10109
CRL.P No. 201231 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098212026
petitioner cannot be considered at this stage, as the
petitioner being the child within the meaning of POCSO
Act, even if there was her consent, such consent is
immaterial. Per contra , as submitted by learned Addl.
SPP, the statement of the victim given before the
respondent Police clearly reveals that there is overt act
of the petitioner that he committed aggravated sexual
assaults repeatedly on the victim. Absolutely there is no
reason to disbelieve the materials forthcoming from the
prosecution on record at this stage.
8. Further, as submitted by the learned Addl.
SPP, there are prima facie materials against the
petitioner for the alleged offence. The said offence is
heinous offence punishable with imprisonment for a
minimum term of 20 years and it may extend to
imprisonment for life which means imprisonment for the
remainder of the person’s natural life.
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10109
CRL.P No. 201231 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098212026
9. Moreover, as observed by the learned
Sessions Judge in the order while denying bail to the
petitioner, there are materials on record that the
petitioner being resident of the same village had
committed the alleged heinous offence on the victim,
who is aged about 13-14 years by alluring and enticing
her under the pretext of love and marriage and took her
away from her parents without informing them and
committed repeated sexual assault on the victim, who is
child within the meaning of POCSO Act.
10. Considering the conduct of petitioner, it
would be clear that if the petitioner is released on bail at
this stage, there is chance of him tampering with
prosecution witnesses and hampering trial of the case.
In such case the prosecution, specifically the
complainant, who is mother of the victim along with the
victim, will be put to hardship and inconvenience.
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10109
CRL.P No. 201231 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098212026
11. The submission of the learned counsel for the
petitioner is that the petitioner has been in judicial
custody from 17.01.2026 i.e., almost for the period of
more than 8 months as on this day. But, as pointed out
by the learned Addl. SPP, considering the gravity of
offence and also the punishment to the alleged offence
which is heinous offence, the mere fact that the
petitioner has been in judicial custody for the period of
more than 8 months cannot be ground to grant bail in
his favour at this stage.
12. There is no special ground made out by the
petitioner to grant bail in his favour. There is absolutely
no reason to disbelieve the reasoning of the trial Court
in the impugned order, wherein the trial Court has
rejected the bail application of the petitioner. The
petitioner has failed to make out any ground to grant
bail in his favour and consequently, this petition is
liable to be dismissed.
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10109
CRL.P No. 201231 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030098212026
13. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
The petition is hereby dismissed.
However, the petitioner is at liberty
move the trial Court/ learned Special
Judge for bail after examination of the
complainant and victim in the case.
Sd/-
(TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY)
JUDGE
MBB
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17