The Karnataka high court on Thursday refused to quash the case registered against former Chief Minister BS Yediyurappa under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act.
Justice M I Arun upheld the trial court’s February 28 order taking cognisance of the alleged offence and issuing summons to Yediyurappa.
However, the judge directed the trial court to not insist on Yediyurappa’s appearance unless it was “absolutely essential” during the course of the trial. The court also clarified that Yediyurappa has the liberty to approach the trial court to seek discharge from the case.
This present order by Justice Arun follows an earlier High Court order dated February 7, when a single bench presided by Justice M Nagaprasanna had set aside the trial court’s first order taking cognisance of the offences against Yediyurappa, holding that it had been passed “without application of mind.” At the time, however, Justice Nagaprasanna had left the probe and final report untouched and sent the matter back to the trial court for fresh consideration.
Also Read | ‘Senior leaders should know better’: HC on Yediyurappa’s bail plea in POCSO case
The trial court then passed a fresh cognisance order on February 28, which was later stayed briefly by the high court through an interim order.
{{/usCountry}}The trial court then passed a fresh cognisance order on February 28, which was later stayed briefly by the high court through an interim order.
{{/usCountry}}The case pertains to a March 2024 complaint filed by a 17-year-old girl’s mother who alleged that Yediyurappa sexually assaulted her daughter during a meeting at his residence in Bengaluru in February 2024.
She said in her complaint that the former Chief Minister had tried to hush up the issue by offering money.
A first information report (FIR) was registred under Section 8 of the Pocso Act and Section 354(A) of the IPC pertaining to sexual harassment of a minor. The case was later transferred to the CID, which re-registered the FIR and filed a charge sheet.
Senior Advocate CV Nagesh, appearing for Yediyurappa, argued that the case was politically motivated and that the complaint lacked credibility.He said that on February 2 last year, the day the alleged offence took place, the victim and her mother had also met the Bengaluru Commissioner of Police but did not mention the incident to him at that time. “If something had happened that morning, they would have opened their mouths before the Commissioner of Police,” Nagesh had argued.
Opposing this, Special Public Prosecutor Professor Ravivarma Kumar maintained that the Special Court had duly considered the evidence, including the victim’s statement, before taking cognisance.
Observing that Yediyurappa was a former Chief Minister and “not some Tom, Dick or Harry,” Justice Dixit had said at the time that no coercive action should be taken as long as Yediyurappa cooperated with the probe.