Back
2025 Supreme(Kar) 334
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT KALABURAGI BENCH
MOHAMMAD NAWAZ, K.S. HEMALEKHA, JJ.
State of Karnataka - Appellant
Versus
Sanna Narasappa S/o Anjalappa Palya - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 200093 of 2015
Decided On : 01-07-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Siddaling P. Patil
For the Respondent: B.C. Jaka
In criminal law, acquittal stands where the prosecution fails to provide credible evidence linking the accused to the crime, particularly regarding identification in cases involving minors.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 363, 366, 324, 376(2)(i) - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Sections 5 and 6 - Acquittal of accused in kidnapping and sexual assault case - Insufficient evidence to establish identity; victim could not identify accused due to darkness; FIR registered against unknown person; evidence of prosecution witnesses inconsistent regarding the identification of the accused. (Paras 2, 12, 17, 22)
(B) Burden of proof - In criminal trials, the prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, particularly where the accused is acquitted at the lower court; the appellate court must not interfere unless compelling reasons are present. (Paras 2, 22)
Facts of the case:
The accused was acquitted of kidnapping and sexual assault of a minor after the victim failed to identify him due to the incident occurring at night, with lack of evidence linking him directly to the crime.
Findings of Court:
Acquittal upheld due to absence of cogent evidence against the accused, and no compelling reasons to overturn the acquittal in appeal.
Issues: Whether the prosecution sufficiently established the identity of the accused and other charges against him.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that in the absence of credible and reliable evidence linking the accused to the crime, particularly the victim's inability to identify him, the acquittal must stand.
Result: Appeal is dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. state appealed against acquittal. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments presented by the prosecution and defense. (Para 3) |
| 3. prosecution details incident and injuries. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. investigation and charge filing process. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. prosecution relies on victim's testimony. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 6. witness reliability questioned. (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 7. victim's identification issues raised. (Para 16 , 17 , 21) |
| 8. confession of accused discussed. (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 9. court finds insufficient evidence for conviction. (Para 22) |
JUDGMENT :
MOHAMMAD NAWAZ, J.
1. This appeal is preferred by the State against the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi dated 17.04.2015 in Sessions Case No.27/2014.
2. Vide impugned judgment, the learned Sessions Judge has acquitted the accused of the offences punishable under Section 363 , 366, 324, 376(2)(i) of IPC and Section 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012.
3. Heard the learned Additional SPP for the State and the learned counsel for respondent/accused and perused the material on record.
4. It is the case of prosecution that on 19.04.2014 at about 10.00 p.m., in Bandepalli Village within the limits of Mudhol Police Station, the accused kidnapped the minor victim, aged about 9 years from the lawful custody of her parents, while she was sleeping on the right side of the Katta of lord Dyavamma (Urudmai) temple, with an intention to commit forcible sexual intercourse and took her towards the land of Shyamappa situated by the side of Halla in Bandepalli Village, fell on her and bit her nose and lips, caused injuries and removed her underwear, touched her private part and thereby committed the charged offences.
5. The learned counsel for respondent has not disputed that the victim was a minor as on the date of incident. The prosecution has relied on the School certificate issued by PW.12 – Headmaster of the School, wherein, the victim pursued her studies. As per Ex.P8, the date of birth of the victim is 18.08.2005 and therefore, she was aged about 9 years.
6. The incident according to the prosecution took place on 19.04.2014 at about 11.30 p.m. In the complaint –Ex.P1 lodged by the victim’s father, examined as PW.1, he has stated that on 18.04.2014 there was a marriage function in his house and all his relatives had come for the said function. On 19.04.2014 at about 10.30 p.m., he along with his minor daughter and other family members slept on the katta of Dyavammagudi. At about 00.10 hrs on 20.04.2014, his daughter came weeping. His cousin Somashekhara, mother- Gowramma (PW.5), brother- Ravindra (PW.6) and his sister-in-law Umadevi (PW.7) also got up. They saw his daughter had sustained bleeding injuries in her mouth and bite marks on her nose. On enquiry, she informed them that while she was sleeping some one came and lifted and took her towards the land of one Venkatappa and on the pathway he bit her nose, lips and put his hand in her private part and spoiled her and when she screamed, he ran away from the spot. It is stated in Ex.P1 that complainant and others took the victim to Sedam Government Hospital for treatment.
7. PW.14 – Doctor has deposed in his evidence that on 20.04.2014 at about 2.30 a.m., victim’s father and others brought the victim girl to the hospital for treatment with a history of assault and rape and on examination he found the following injuries:
1. Abrasion over tip measuring 1 x 1 cm, red.
2. Abrasion over right face near right eye 1 x 1 cm, red.
3. Abrasion over right nexk, 1 x 2 cm, red (nail prick)
4. Swollen upper lip, red.
5. Vaginal tear 2 cm inner part side inflamed vagina middle part. No local stain.
He has issued the medical certificate as per Ex.P11.
8. PW.18 – PI, on receiving the MLC intimation, visited the hospital and recorded the statement of PW.1 as per Ex.P1. He registered a case against unknown person for offences punishable under Section 3 63 , 366, 324, 376 r/w 511 of IPC and Section 3 , 4, 7 and
