Karnataka High Court
Criminal LawCriminal Procedure and Evidence

Material contradictions in the minor victim’s statements and prolonged custody warranted bail in the POCSO case.

HANUMANTHAPPA M.B. S/O MALAKAPPA BELAVANER vs STATE OF KARNATAKA

Karnataka High CourtJUDGMENT: September 29, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Material contradictions in the minor victim’s statements and prolonged custody warranted bail in the POCSO case.. HANUMANTHAPPA M.B. S/O MALAKAPPA BELAVANER vs STATE OF KARNATAKA. Karnataka High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The prosecution alleged that the petitioner abducted the victim, who was then approximately 16 years and 5 months old, took her to Kollur and married her, and thereafter subjected her to sexual assault and confinement

Source reference: p. 3–4

The petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody; after the investigation was completed and a charge-sheet filed, he sought bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

Source reference: p. 4–5

The case was registered under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(m) and 127(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Sections 6, 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012; and Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006

Source reference: p. 2–3
02

Issues

1. Whether the petitioner should be enlarged on bail in light of the victim’s age, the allegations, and the material collected during investigation

Source reference: p. 5–7

2. Whether the petitioner’s custody, completion of investigation, and the anticipated duration of trial justified release subject to conditions

Source reference: p. 7–8
03

Law Applied

The petitioner invoked Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, corresponding to Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as the provision for seeking bail from the High Court

Source reference: p. 2

The alleged offences arose under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006

Source reference: p. 2–3

The Court applied its discretion to grant bail subject to conditions addressing attendance at trial, interference with prosecution witnesses, and further offending

Source reference: p. 7–8

No precedent was cited.

Source reference: no citation
04

Reasoning

The Court noted that the victim was a minor and that the medical record recorded the absence of the hymen

Source reference: p. 5, 7

It also considered the asserted contradictions between the victim’s statements, the Court’s observation that her statement under Section 183 of the BNSS did not allege repeated aggravated penetrative sexual assault by the petitioner, and the petitioner’s six months in custody

Source reference: p. 4–7

With the investigation complete, the charge-sheet filed, and trial likely to take time, the Court found that bail could be granted subject to stringent conditions

Source reference: p. 5, 7–8
05

Holding

The Court allowed the petition and ordered the petitioner’s release on bail in the pending case on execution of a personal bond of ₹2,00,000 with two sureties for the like sum

He must not threaten or tamper with prosecution witnesses, attend the trial court as required, and refrain from similar or other offences; breach of any condition may lead the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail

Source reference: p. 8
06

Acts & Sections Cited

13 provisions across 5 statutes referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.

Code of Criminal Procedure, 19733

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20232

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 20234

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 20123

Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 20061

Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF

HANUMANTHAPPA M.B. S/O MALAKAPPA BELAVANERvsSTATE OF KARNATAKA

Karnataka High Court · September 29, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment