HC grants anticipatory bail to Yediyurappa in Pocso case

Bengaluru: The Karnataka high court Friday granted anticipatory bail to BS Yediyurappa in a Pocso case and quashed a July 4, 2024, order passed by a special court which took cognisance of the offences alleged against the former chief minister and others accused in the case.
However, Justice M Nagaprasanna ruled that the "crime, the investigation, and the final report all remain intact, while remitting the matter back to the court concerned to pass appropriate orders on the final report (charge-sheet) by the CID.
"It has been made clear that this court has not answered any of the contentions so advanced by both counsels except the submission with regard to the order of taking cognisance," Justice Nagaprasanna said. "All other contentions remain open. The petitioners are at liberty to avail all such remedy, as is available in law, at the appropriate stage, before the appropriate forum."
For any trial to commence, the court concerned must first take cognisance of offences alleged in the charge-sheet and hold that there is prima facie ground to proceed with a trial.
The complainant had alleged that Yediyurappa sexually harassed her 17-year-old daughter on Feb 2 last year, when they went to his house seeking help. Incidentally, the complainant — the survivor's mother — died of cancer on May 26 last year.
Challenging the charges, Yediyurappa and others claimed she was a habitual and disgruntled complainant and that she had registered 58 cases against several people, while some had registered cases against her.
Denying the occurrence of the alleged incident, Yediyurappa claimed that the complaint was registered to wreak political vengeance, and that the order of taking cognisance suffers from blatant non-application of mind, as the court concerned had, in a few irrelevant lines, taken cognisance of the offences against all the accused, including him.
After perusing the materials on record, Justice Nagaprasanna pointed out that the Supreme Court clearly held that the order of taking cognisance and issuance of process (summons) should bear application of mind. "The necessity of recording reasons for existence of sufficient ground is thus imperative and those reasons are discernible only if they are recorded in writing," the judge said.
Referring to the July 4 order of taking of cognisance, Justice Nagaprasanna noted that the trial court "perused the charge sheet and all documents" and that the court was satisfied that, prima facie, the accused had committed a crime.
But Justice Nagaprasanna said: "The order of taking cognisance and issuing of process does not bear even a semblance of application of mind..." while again pointing out that application of mind in an order is discernible only if reasons are recorded in writing. "Failing this, the order would depict an inscrutable face of the sphinx," the judge noted.