Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
Manjunatha, S/o. Hulugabhovi – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Karnataka, By Ramanagara Town P.S Represented By Its State Public Prosecutor High Court Of Karnataka, Bangalore – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments regarding victim's age and evidence. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's consideration of age determination. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. understanding provisions related to age evidence. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. court's analysis of evidence and reliability. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 6. factors leading to doubt in prosecution's evidence. (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 7. final judgment and acquittal of the accused. (Para 16) |
JUDGMENT :
SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR, J.
1. This appeal is filed against the judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 01.08.2018 passed in Spl.C. No. 45/2017 by I Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Ramanagara, convicting the appellant - accused for offence under Section 366-A, 376(2)(i) of IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act and sentencing to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years for offence punishable under Section 376(2)(i) of IPC and rigorous imprisonment for 3 years for offence under Section 366-A of IPC.
2. Factual matrix of the prosecution case is that seven months prior to the incident the appellant - accused and victim girl – P.W.1 were known to each other. On 17.01.2017 the appellant - accused asked the
Prosecution must establish victim's age and consent beyond reasonable doubt; reliance on unverified documents and lack of corroboration leads to acquittal in sexual assault cases.
The conviction in sexual offences requires credible and reliable evidence, especially regarding the victim's age, and reliance solely on secondary evidence without primary proof is insufficient.
The court established that the burden of proving a victim's age lies with the prosecution, and the absence of reliable evidence necessitates giving the benefit of doubt to the accused.
Prosecution failed to sufficiently prove the victim's age or the alleged offences, resulting in the acquittal of the accused due to insufficient evidence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of proving the age of the victim to establish the commission of offences under the POCSO Act. The judgment emphasizes the admissibil....
Point of Law : Prosecution has failed to prove beyond doubt that the victim was below 18 years of age as on the date of the incident. Under these circumstances, the accused cannot be held guilty of o....
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.
(1) It is only when there is penetrative sexual assault which implies sexual contact with or without consent of minor victim, that offences under POCSO Act are committed.(2) Only in absence of birth ....
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
