Back
K. SOMASHEKAR, C. M. JOSHI
State by Assistant Superintendent of Police, Puttur – Appellant
Versus
Mithun Kumar S/o Shivaram Naik – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
K. SOMASHEKAR, J.
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of acquittal rendered by the Court of the II Addl. District and Sessions (Special) Judge, D.K. Mangaluru, in Spl. C. No. 2/2011 dated 08.10.2015 acquitting the accused for offences punishable under Sections 376 of IPC, 1860 besides Section 3(2)(v) of the SC & ST (POA) Act, 1989. This appeal has been filed by the State seeking intervention by considering the grounds urged therein and to set-aside the judgment of acquittal rendered by the Trial Court and to consequently to convict the accused for the offences leveled against him.
2. Heard the learned HCGP for the appellant/State and so also the learned counsel Shri B. Lethif for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. In this matter, though process has been served on Respondent No. 3/Malini, she remains absent and unrepresented. Perused the judgment of acquittal rendered by the Trial Court in Spl. C. No. 2/2011 consisting the evidence of PW-1 to PW-14 and several documents got marked at Exhibits P1 to P16.
3. The factual matrix of the appeal is as under:
Point of Law : Acquittal judgment rendered by Trial Court does not suffer from any infirmity and there is no perversity, absurdity or illegality committed by Trial Court. [Para 31]
The court emphasized that prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and inconsistencies in testimonies and lack of medical evidence prohibited sustaining the conviction.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of providing a proper explanation for the delay in filing a complaint and highlights the rarity of false charges of rape.
The court affirmed that acquittal was proper, emphasizing the need for corroborative evidence in sexual assault cases and the prosecution’s failure to prove kidnapping or consent under the specified ....
The prosecution must prove the victim's age and presence of sexual assault beyond reasonable doubt; lack of corroborative evidence can lead to acquittal.
The prosecution must prove the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and the absence of corroborating evidence can weaken the case.
The prosecution failed to prove the accusations of kidnapping and sexual offences beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the upholding of the trial court's acquittal.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
