<p>Bengaluru: The <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/karnataka-high-court">Karnataka High Court</a> on Friday directed the special court to consider afresh and pass appropriate orders on the CID final report in the case against former Chief Minister <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/b-s-yediyurappa">BS Yediyurappa </a>under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. </p><p>Justice M Nagaprasanna passed this order while partly allowing the petitions filed by Yediyurappa and other accused. The court has also granted anticipatory bail to Yediyurappa while allowing his other petition.</p>.Karnataka High Court to pronounce verdicts on plea for CBI probe in MUDA case, POCSO case against Yediyurappa on February 7.<p>“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. It is made clear that this court has not answered any of the contentions so advanced by both the counsels, except the submission with regard to the order of taking cognizance. All other contentions shall 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,” the court said.</p><p>The chargesheet, filed by the CID, stated that former Chief Minister had sexually harassed the 17-year-old daughter of the complainant woman on February 2, 2024. The incident had happened at Yediyurappa’s house when the complainant and her daughter had gone to seek help in another case. Incidentally, the complainant woman died of cancer on May 26, 2024.</p><p>In his petition, Yediyurappa claimed that the complainant mother was a habitual and disgruntled complainant and had registered 58 cases against several people and a few cases are also registered against her. It was further contended that special court order taking cognizance suffers from blatant non-application of mind.</p><p>Justice Nagaprasanna cited Apex Court judgements wherein it was held that the order of taking cognizance and issuance of process should bear application of mind. The HC examined the July 4, 2024 order of the special court taking cognizance and said the trial court only observes ‘perused the charge sheet and all the documents’.</p><p>“Therefore, cognizance is taken under Section 190(1) (b) and summons issued ostensibly under Section 204 of the CrPC. 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 Supreme Court in its judgments. It is needless to observe that the order should bear application of mind and application of mind in an order is discernible, only if reasons are recorded in writing, failing which, the order would depict an inscrutable face of the sphinx,” the court said.</p>
<p>Bengaluru: The <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/karnataka-high-court">Karnataka High Court</a> on Friday directed the special court to consider afresh and pass appropriate orders on the CID final report in the case against former Chief Minister <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/b-s-yediyurappa">BS Yediyurappa </a>under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. </p><p>Justice M Nagaprasanna passed this order while partly allowing the petitions filed by Yediyurappa and other accused. The court has also granted anticipatory bail to Yediyurappa while allowing his other petition.</p>.Karnataka High Court to pronounce verdicts on plea for CBI probe in MUDA case, POCSO case against Yediyurappa on February 7.<p>“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. It is made clear that this court has not answered any of the contentions so advanced by both the counsels, except the submission with regard to the order of taking cognizance. All other contentions shall 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,” the court said.</p><p>The chargesheet, filed by the CID, stated that former Chief Minister had sexually harassed the 17-year-old daughter of the complainant woman on February 2, 2024. The incident had happened at Yediyurappa’s house when the complainant and her daughter had gone to seek help in another case. Incidentally, the complainant woman died of cancer on May 26, 2024.</p><p>In his petition, Yediyurappa claimed that the complainant mother was a habitual and disgruntled complainant and had registered 58 cases against several people and a few cases are also registered against her. It was further contended that special court order taking cognizance suffers from blatant non-application of mind.</p><p>Justice Nagaprasanna cited Apex Court judgements wherein it was held that the order of taking cognizance and issuance of process should bear application of mind. The HC examined the July 4, 2024 order of the special court taking cognizance and said the trial court only observes ‘perused the charge sheet and all the documents’.</p><p>“Therefore, cognizance is taken under Section 190(1) (b) and summons issued ostensibly under Section 204 of the CrPC. 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 Supreme Court in its judgments. It is needless to observe that the order should bear application of mind and application of mind in an order is discernible, only if reasons are recorded in writing, failing which, the order would depict an inscrutable face of the sphinx,” the court said.</p>