Karnataka HC Grants Bail in POCSO Case, Cites Temple Marriage and Consensual Cohabitation with 17-Year-Old

Justice S Vishwajith Shetty granted bail to a 28-year-old man charged under POCSO and BNS after finding the victim and accused had married in a temple and lived together consensually, with the trial yet to commence.

The High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru has granted regular bail to Sri Manjunatha, a 28-year-old resident of Chikkalasandra Village, Shidlaghatta Taluk, Chikkaballapura District, who was arrested in connection with a POCSO case registered by Srinivasapura Police Station, Kolar District. Justice S Vishwajith Shetty, sitting singly, allowed Criminal Petition No. 513 of 2026 filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The court found that the accused and the victim — who was 17 years old at the relevant time — had married in a temple, lived together in a rented house in Vijayapura, and had consensual relations. With no prior criminal antecedents and the trial yet to begin, the court held that continued custody was not warranted.

The FIR and Charges Against the Accused

Crime No. 146 of 2025 was registered by Srinivasapura Police Station, Kolar District, on the basis of a first information submitted on 16 May 2025 by the mother of the victim girl, who was then aged 16 years and 5 months. The mother reported that her daughter had left for college on 28 April 2025 and had not returned. Efforts to trace her failed, leading to the delayed complaint.

During investigation, the petitioner and the victim girl were traced together. Manjunatha was arrested on 19 May 2025 and remanded to judicial custody. After the investigation was completed, a charge sheet was filed against him for offences punishable under Section 137(2), 64(2)(m), 127(2), and 127(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.

His bail application before the trial court — the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court-I (POCSO), Kolar — was rejected on 29 October 2025 in Special Case (POCSO) No. 54 of 2025. He then approached the High Court.

What the Victim's Statement and Witness Evidence Showed

The victim girl's statement was recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023 by the jurisdictional Magistrate on 9 June 2025. In that statement, she said she had become acquainted with the petitioner, who proposed marriage to her. In April 2025, she told her relatives she was going to college, but instead went to a Lakshmi Narasimha Swami Temple with the petitioner, where they got married. The petitioner then took her to Vijayapura, where they stayed in a rented house and lived as husband and wife.

The victim also stated that the petitioner later began doubting her and would lock her inside the house when he left for work. She said she informed the house owner about her situation. Her parents subsequently came to Vijayapura and brought her back to the village.

The prosecution recorded the statement of Ramesh, the owner of the house where the couple resided. The court noted that Ramesh did not state anything about ill-treatment of the victim girl by the petitioner, nor did he confirm that the victim had brought any such complaint to his notice.

How the Court Reasoned on Bail

Justice Shetty observed that the petitioner had no other criminal antecedents. The court characterised the situation as one where the victim and the petitioner, who were in love, got married in a temple and lived together for a considerable period in a rented house, and that the sexual relations between them were consensual.

The court took note of the victim's age — approximately 17 years at the time — and observed that “she had the worldly knowledge about the consequences of her act.” The court also pointed out that the trial in the case was yet to commence and that the allegations in the charge sheet remained to be proved in a full-fledged trial.

On the question of the house owner's evidence, the court found it significant that Ramesh's statement did not corroborate the victim's account of being locked inside the house or of having complained to him about ill-treatment. This gap in the prosecution's material weighed in favour of bail at this stage.

Bail Conditions Imposed

The court allowed the criminal petition and directed that Manjunatha be enlarged on bail in Special Case (POCSO) No. 54 of 2025 pending before the Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-I, Kolar, subject to the following conditions:

• He shall execute a personal bond for Rs. 1,00,000 (Rupees One Lakh) with two sureties for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court.
• He shall appear regularly on all dates of hearing before the trial court unless his appearance is exempted for valid reasons.
• He shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with prosecution witnesses.
• He shall not involve himself in similar offences in future.

Order

Criminal Petition No. 513 of 2026 was allowed by Justice S Vishwajith Shetty on 16 June 2026. Sri Manjunatha, accused in Special Case (POCSO) No. 54 of 2025 arising out of Crime No. 146 of 2025 registered by Srinivasapura Police Station, Kolar District, was directed to be released on bail subject to the conditions set out above. The petition was filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023. The petitioner was represented by Sri K. Thejas, Advocate, and the State was represented by Sri Rangaswamy R, High Court Government Pleader.