Back
SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR, C. M. JOSHI
Manikanta @ Puli S/o Shanmugam – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
The accused has stood convicted for the offences punishable under sections 376 (2) (i)(n) and 506 of Indian Penal Code (‘IPC’ for short), and section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (‘POCSO Act’ for short) and sentenced to life under section 6 of the POCSO Act, and simple imprisonment for one year with fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence under section 506 IPC. The argument of Sri Hashmath Pasha, learned senior counsel, gives rise to following questions to be answered :
ii. Is Ex.P.8 hit by section 162 of Cr.P.C.?
iii. Is conviction of the accused vitiated for not drawing his attention to the age of PW1 when he was examined under section 313 Cr.P.C.?
2. Before answering the above questions, briefly the incident that led to prosecuting the accused may be stated here. PW1 developed acquaintance with the accused when she was a student of 5th standard as the latter used to visit the house of her neighbour viz., Yashodha. 16.06.2016 was her birthday (annual). Around 6.00 p.m. on that day accused went to the house of PW
Public documents, such as school admission registers, can be admitted as evidence without the original author’s testimony, provided they are maintained in the regular course of business.
The court emphasized that mere admissibility of evidence does not establish its probative value, particularly when witness testimonies are inconsistent and influenced, raising reasonable doubt regard....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove the victim's age to invoke the provisions of the POCSO Act and the evidentiary value of the School Leaving Certificate ....
(1) Entry of date of birth, as recorded in School Register, is relevant and admissible in evidence under Section 35 of Evidence Act.(2) Mere fact that wisdom tooth have not erupted is not of great im....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for legally admissible evidence to prove the prosecutrix's age and the need for the prosecutrix's testimony to inspire confidence.
The court clarified that the status of a perpetrator as a public servant does not require them to act in that capacity during the commission of an aggravated sexual assault.
Point of law: Since the appellant/accused had made the victim pregnant by his act of penetrative sexual assault the offence under Section 5(j)(ii) of the POCSO Act is also attracted and conviction of....
The court emphasized that the burden to prove the victim's age lies with the prosecution, which failed to establish it through credible evidence, leading to the acquittal of the appellant.
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
