Daijiworld Media Network – Bengaluru
Bengaluru, Nov 13: The Karnataka High Court on Thursday refused to quash the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act case registered against former chief minister B S Yediyurappa.
Justice M I Arun upheld the trial court’s February 28 order taking cognisance of the alleged offence and issuing summons to the senior BJP leader.
The court, however, directed that Yediyurappa’s personal appearance should not be insisted upon unless necessary during the trial and clarified that any exemption plea filed on his behalf should be entertained unless his presence is deemed essential. The bench also noted that the former CM is free to seek discharge from the trial court.
Earlier, on February 7, the High Court had set aside the trial court’s first order of cognisance, citing lack of proper application of mind, but upheld the validity of the investigation and the final report.
Following this, the Special Court passed a fresh cognisance order on February 28, which was subsequently stayed by the High Court.
According to the complaint lodged by the victim’s mother, Yediyurappa allegedly sexually assaulted her 17-year-old daughter during a meeting at his Bengaluru residence in February 2024.
The Sadashivanagar police registered the case on March 14, 2024, which was later transferred to the CID for further investigation. The agency re-registered the FIR and filed a chargesheet against the former CM.
Senior Advocate C V Nagesh, representing Yediyurappa, claimed the case was politically motivated and that the complaint lacked credibility. “The complainant and her daughter met the Bengaluru Police Commissioner several times in February 2024 but did not mention any allegation until March 14,” Nagesh said.
He added that witnesses present during the alleged incident had stated that nothing untoward occurred. Nagesh contended that the special court had acted mechanically while issuing the cognisance order without properly evaluating the material on record and urged the High Court to quash the proceedings, asserting that the allegations were baseless and driven by ulterior motives.
Opposing this, special public prosecutor Professor Ravivarma Kumar said the special court had duly considered the evidence, including the victim’s statement, before taking cognisance. “The trial court’s order is reasoned and reflects proper judicial application of mind,” he maintained.