Karnataka High Court refuses to quash POCSO case against BS Yeddiyurappa but...

The Karnataka High Court on Friday refused to quash the case registered against former Chief Minister and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader BS Yeddiyurappa under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act) but found the trial court's order taking cognisance (judicial notice) of the case to be cryptic and hence liable to be obliterated [BS Yeddyurappa v. CID and anr]..A Bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna delivered the judgment on a petition filed by Yeddiyurappa to quash the case. The Court found that there was sufficient material, including an audio recording that linked Yeddiyurappa to the allegations made against him. A forensic report has also confirmed that the voice in the audio belonged to Yeddiyurappa and was not morphed and that the device containing it (a mobile phone) had not been hacked. The Court clarified that this did not indicate Yeddiyurappa's guilt per se, but that it was required to be tested in trial. "These matters would undoubtedly require to be thrashed out in a full-blown trial," the judge observed..The Court added that this may have been a basis to reject Yeddiyurappa's petition altogether, had it not been for the cryptic trial court order passed on July 4, 2024, when cognisance was taken of the alleged crime against the former Chief Minster. "The bald, laconic and cryptic order of the (trial) Court is what merits the partial entertainment of the petition ... The order of taking cognizance and issuing of process does not bear even a semblance of application of mind. It runs completely counter to the necessity under Section 190(1)(b) or Section 204 of the CrPC as elucidated by the Apex Court," the High Court found. .It, therefore, quashed the trial court's common cognisance order against Yeddiyurappa as well as co-accused persons who have been accused of having aided in burying evidence. "The order of taking cognizance ... stands obliterated. The crime, the investigation and the final report, all remain intact. The matter is remitted back to the hands of the concerned Court to pass appropriate orders on the final report so placed before it by the CID, bearing in mind the observations made in the course of the order," the Court ordered. .The Court today also granted Yeddiyurappa anticipatory bail in the same case. .The order of taking cognizance stands obliterated. The crime, the investigation and the final report, all remain intactKarnataka High Court.The case in focus was registered on the allegations made by a woman that Yediyurappa molested her 17-year-old daughter who had accompanied her on a visit to the senior BJP leader's residence to seek some help.The girl’s mother, now deceased, lodged a police complaint on March 14, 2024, accusing Yediyurappa of having sexually harassed the girl. She also said in her complaint that the former Chief Minister had tried to hush up the issue by offering her money.Based on such complaint, the police registered a First Information Report (FIR) under Section 8 of the POCSO Act and Section 354(A) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) on charges of sexual harassment of a minor..On July 4 that year, a trial court passed a common cognisance order to take judicial notice of the case registered against Yediyurappa as well as three others accused of offences under Sections 204 (destruction of document to prevent its production as evidence), 214 (offering gifts, property to anyone to shield someone from legal punishment) read with Section 37 (co-operation by doing one of several acts constituting an offence) of the IPC. Representing Yediyurappa, Senior Advocate CV Nagesh argued that these provisions were not even applicable to his client, who had only been booked under Section 8 of the POCSO Act and Section 354(A) of the IPC. On the other hand, the trial court order in question said,"Therefore, on being satisfied with prima facie materials placed records, exercising the powers U/s 190(1) (b) r/w Section 193 of CrPC, cognizance is taken for the offences punishable Under Section 8 of POCSO Act, 2012, Section 354(A), 204 and 214 r/w Sec.37 of IPC.".In the order passed today, the Court found merit in the argument that the trial court had failed to apply its mind. The trial court is not expected to be a post office to the prosecution, Justice Nagaprasanna added. It was also noted that the cognisance order did not cite Section 204 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) while issuing process..The Crime Investigation Department (CID), which handled the investigation and prosecution in this case, had defended the trial court order, arguing that trial courts usually take cognisance of cases in this manner, in 80 per cent of cases. "That would not impress this Court to dismiss the petition and permit perpetration of irregularity or illegality by the concerned Court, just because it has become a habit to take cognizance and issue summons in this manner," Justice Nagaprasanna opined. .Advocates Sandeep Patil and Swamini Ganesh Mohanambal also represented Yeddiyurappa and other co-accused. Senior Advocate Prof. Ravivarma Kumar along with Special Public Prosecutor Ashok N Naik represented the CID.Advocate S Balakrishan represented the original complainant’s son (victim’s brother)..[Read Judgment]