Karnataka HC Denies Anticipatory Bail To Man Accused Of Repeatedly Sexually Assaulting 17-Year-Old, Citing SC/ST Act Bar

The petitioner sought anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No. 51/2026.

The case arose after the 17-year-old victim’s mother reported her missing.

The victim later appeared with her grandmother and stated that she had gone with the petitioner, who allegedly took her to a rented room and repeatedly sexually assaulted her.

The victim had previously been married, as a minor, to another person and had a seven-month-old child.

The case included allegations under the Prevention of Child Marriage Act, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the POCSO Act, and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

The State opposed anticipatory bail, relying on the alleged offences, the ongoing investigation, and the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act.

Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, provides the procedural basis for seeking anticipatory bail.

The Court applied Section 18 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act as barring anticipatory bail where the record discloses a prima facie case for an offence under that Act.

The Court considered the alleged offences under Sections 9 and 10 of the Prevention of Child Marriage Act, Section 64(2)(m) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Sections 6 and 17 of the POCSO Act, and Sections 3(1)(w-i) and 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act.

The Court considered the victim’s statements to the police and the Magistrate, alongside the prosecution materials, and found a prima facie case against the petitioner under the SC/ST Act.

It also noted that the investigation remained incomplete and found no basis at that stage to disbelieve the prosecution account.

In view of the prima facie case and the statutory bar under Section 18, the Court held that the petitioner was not entitled to anticipatory bail, without undertaking a detailed examination of the merits.