01Facts
The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, accused No. 1, came into contact with the victim while she was studying in II PUC and, on 18 January 2023, took her to a hotel and committed penetrative sexual assault, having promised to marry her.
p. 3 · p. 5The victim lodged a complaint on 9 November 2025, after learning that the petitioner had married another woman, and also alleged that photographs and videos were circulated to her relatives and friends
p. 3 · p. 5The petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody; after the investigation was completed and the charge-sheet filed, he sought regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS
p. 2 · p. 4 · p. 7The case was pending as Special S.C. No. 3/2026, arising from Crime No. 157/2025 of Gokul Road Police Station, for offences under Sections 376, 417, 504 and 506 IPC, Sections 4, 6, 14 and 15 of the POCSO Act, and Section 67 of the IT Act
p. 2 · p. 702Issues
i.Whether the petitioner should be enlarged on regular bail, considering the allegations, the victim’s age, and the circumstances of the case
p. 5 · p. 7ii.Whether the asserted risks of witness tampering and further circulation of the victim’s photographs or videos warranted refusal of bail
p. 603Law Applied
The Court exercised its regular-bail jurisdiction under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure)
p. 2In deciding the application, it considered the nature and gravity of the offences, the petitioner’s position in relation to the victim and witnesses, the delay in lodging the complaint, the medical opinion, the victim’s statement under Section 183 BNSS, and the completion of the investigation and filing of the charge-sheet
p. 5 · p. 7No precedent was cited.
Provisions in the judgment · 10 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 439
Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 376Section 417Section 504Section 506
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Section 4Section 6Section 14Section 15
Information Technology Act, 2000 Section 67
04Reasoning
The Court noted that the victim was a minor at the time of the alleged incident, but also considered that the complaint was lodged about two years and ten months later, after she learned of the petitioner’s marriage to another woman
p. 5It examined the Section 183 BNNS statement and the medical report, which stated that sexual assault could neither be confirmed nor refuted, and treated the absence of a definite medical opinion as a relevant bail consideration
p. 6 · p. 7Although the State and the victim’s counsel raised concerns about witness tampering and further circulation of the images, the Court concluded that the overall circumstances—including completion of the investigation and filing of the charge-sheet—favoured release subject to conditions addressing those risks
p. 6 · p. 805Holding
The Court allowed the petition and ordered the petitioner’s release on bail in Special S.C. No. 3/2026 upon execution of a personal bond of ₹2,00,000 with two sureties for the like sum
p. 7Conditions included not threatening or tampering with prosecution witnesses, attending trial as required, not committing similar or other offences, and not uploading or circulating the victim’s photographs or videos; breach of any condition would entitle the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail
p. 7 · p. 8The Court clarified that its observations were confined to disposal of the bail petition.
p. 8Original Court PDF
SHRI. SHANKAR ALIAS SHANKRAPPA S/O GYANAPPA RATHODvsTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
