Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
Ashoka S/o Ishwara Naika – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
ORDER :
1. This criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. is filed with a prayer to set-aside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 16.11.2015 passed in CC No.27/2009 by the Court of Addl. Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) and JMFC, Hosanagara and the judgment and order dated 29.06.2016 passed in Criminal Appeal No.287/2015 by the Court of V Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Shivamogga, sitting at Sagar.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. Petitioner herein was charge sheeted for offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC. It is the case of the prosecution that on 25.11.2008 at about 11.00 a.m., petitioner kidnapped the minor daughter of PW1/Jayappa. Subsequently the petitioner and the victim girl were traced in Bengaluru and brought back to their village. Petitioner, who had appeared before the Trial Court in response to the summons issued to him after the charge sheet was filed in the present case, had pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution in order to prove its charges against the petitioner, had examined eleven charge sheet witnesses as PW1 to PW11 and got marked nine documents as Ex.P1 to Ex.P9. No mate
Prosecution must provide conclusive evidence of a victim's age to sustain a conviction for kidnapping under Section 363 of IPC; reliance on school records alone is insufficient without additional cor....
The conviction for abduction was upheld, emphasizing the importance of official records in determining the victim's age, and highlighting that consensual relationships may not constitute offenses if ....
Charges under Sections 363, 366 IPC and Section 8 of POCSO Act require proof of inducement or coercion, which was not established as the victim left voluntarily.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the determination of the victim's age and its significance in establishing the offense of kidnapping under Section 363 IPC.
The prosecution must prove the victim's age and the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt, with evidence of consent negating charges of kidnapping and rape.
The prosecution must prove a victim's age beyond reasonable doubt, and consent negates charges of kidnapping and rape when the victim willingly engages in a relationship.
Prosecution must prove age and lack of consent beyond reasonable doubt for charges of rape and kidnapping; prior voluntary cohabitation casts doubt on claims of forced sexual intercourse.
The court upheld the conviction under Section 363 but exonerated the petitioner under Section 376 due to lack of forced sexual intercourse and credible evidence regarding victim's age and consent.
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
