Gang Rape of Poor Minor: Karnataka HC Denies Bail to 68-Year-Old

The Karnataka High Court recently dismissed bail plea of a 68-year-old man, accused of gang-raping a minor girl belonging to a Scheduled Caste, after observing that his actions were an “outrageous” abuse of the victim's poverty and innocence.

Court emphasized that the man, as an elderly person, should have prevented such a heinous crime instead of participating in it.

The order was passed by the single-judge bench of Justice S Rachaiah in a criminal appeal filed under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989. The appellant, namely Channappar @ Rajaiah @Angadi Raja, who is Accused No. 2 in the case, had sought to set aside the order dated July 15, 2025, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, FTSC-II, Mandya, and be enlarged on bail. The case was registered in 2024 at K.R. Pete Rural Police Station.

Channappar was charged with serious offences under multiple statutes, including Sections 376(3), 376(2)(n), 376DA, 450 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC); Sections 4, 5(G), 5(K), 5(L), 6, 10 of the POCSO Act; and Sections 3(1)(w), 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act.

The prosecution's case rested on a complaint filed by the victim girl’s mother after a Government hospital doctor in K.R. Pete informed her that the minor was pregnant. The victim, on enquiry, disclosed that five persons were responsible for her pregnancy, leading to the registration of a complaint against all of them. The incident of sexual assault was alleged to have occurred between May 1, 2024, and June 30, 2024.

The victim, who was a minor aged about 14 years and belonged to a Scheduled Caste, stated that she had been sexually assaulted on several occasions by Channappar and others. The charge sheet detailed that the accused induced the victim by promising her "eatables and new clothes etc." to take advantage of her poverty and innocence.

"The statement of the victim would indicate that it was a gang rape committed by all the five persons against such a young victim on the pretext of seduction to get her eatables from shop and also misused the innocence and poverty of the victim-girl," the prosecution submitted.

Appearing for Channappar, Adv. Shankar H.S. contended that Channappar was innocent, falsely implicated, and should be granted bail, particularly given his age of 68 years and his judicial custody since December 23, 2024. The counsel also pointed to a significant detail in the investigation that “the DNA of Channappar did not match with the fetus.”. This non-matching DNA was presented as a crucial ground for bail.

However, Adv. Pushpalatha, High Court Government Pleader (HCGP) for the State, and Adv. Maitreyi Krishnan, counsel for the victim, vehemently opposed the appeal. They argued that Channappar, despite being an elderly person, committed a “heinous offence” against a minor similar in age to his granddaughter, thereby not deserving bail.

After hearing both sides and perusing the charge sheet, Justice Rachaiah acknowledged the gravity of the allegations. Court observed that Channappar, along with others, committed a "ruthless act" by taking advantage of the minor girl’s poverty and innocence.

In a strong observation, court stated, "The manner in which the appellant and others had committed sexual assault on the minor girl should be condemned, especially the appellant herein.".

Court remarked on Channappar's obligation as an elder, noting, "The appellant being an elderly person should have advised and instructed others not to commit such a heinous offence or he should have brought to the notice of elders of the village to prevent it".

Consequently, court dismissed the criminal appeal.

Case Title: Mr. Channappar @ Rajaiah @Angadi Raja vs. State of Karnataka and Another

Judgment Date: September 1, 2025

Bench: Justice S Rachaiah