IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 28^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100331 OF 2018

BETWEEN

STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY THE

SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE (L&O),

HADAGALI POLICE STATION,

DIST: BALLARI,

THROUGH THE

ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE,

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

DHARWAD BENCH.

...APPELLANT

(By Sri.V.M.BANAKAR, ADDL SPP)

AND

HADAPADA MANJUNATHA

S/O SHEKHARAPPA

AGE: 21 YEARS,

OCC: WORKING IN CLOTH SHOP,

Crl.A.NO.100331 OF 2018

2

R/O: WARD NO.4,

MUDUKANA KATTE AREA,

KOTTURU CITY,

KUDLIGI TALUK.

…RESPONDENT

(By Sri.SATHISH M S, ADVOCATE )

---

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 378(1) & (3) OF

CR.P.C. SEEKING TO

A) TO GRANT LEAVE TO APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND

ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED 02.04.2018 PASSED BY THE I-

ADDL.

DIST.

&

SESSIONS

JUDGE,

BALLARI,

IN

S.C.NO.127/2013;

B) TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL

DATED 02.04.2018 PASSED BY THE I-ADDL. DIST. & SESSIONS

JUDGE, BALLARI, IN S.C.NO.127/2013; AND

C) CONVICT THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCES

P/U/S 366, 376 OF IPC AND U/S 3 & 4 OF POCSO ACT.

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND

RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 10.02.2022, COMING ON FOR

PRONOUNCEMENT

OF

JUDGMENT,

THOUGH

VIDEO

CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, S.RACHAIAH J., DELIVERED THE

FOLLOWING:

Crl.A.NO.100331 OF 2018

3

JUDGMENT

The Appellant has preferred this appeal against the

acquittal order passed by the learned Special Judge, Bellary, in

S.C.No.127/2013 for the offence punishable under Sections 366

and 376 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter for brevity referred to

as, ‘IPC’) and Sections 3 and 4 of the Protection of Children from

Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as,

‘POCSO’).

2.

For the purpose of convenience, the ranking of the

parties is considered as that of the Trial Court.

Brief facts of the case:

3.

On 07.03.2013, at about 6.00 pm, the complainant

and victim had been to Hadagali for Gyaravi festival. They have

traveled in a bus and alighted at Hadagali bus stand. The

accused had also traveled in the said bus and got down at

Hadagali bus stop.

Crl.A.NO.100331 OF 2018

4

4.

The complainant had gone to bring the fruits and

asked the victim to watch the luggage and stand there. The

complainant after returning noticed that, the victim was not

there. On thorough enquiry and search, she noticed that, the

accused had taken the victim along with him in a bus. The

complainant noticed them in the bus which was moving and she

was unable to stop the bus.

5.

After returning home, she, her husband (PW4) and

many elderly persons of the community approached the elders of

the accused family and informed them about the incident. The

brother of the accused i.e. PW7 assured them that he would

secure them within three to four days and requested them not to

lodge any complaint as the reputation of the family would be at

stake. Believing his version, the complainant and her husband

along with the elders returned to their respective homes and

they kept quite till 14.03.2013. On that day, the complainant

again approached the elders and informed that, the brother of

the accused had not kept his assurance and he had not made

any efforts to secure the presence of the accused and victim.

Crl.A.NO.100331 OF 2018

5

The elders of the community advised her to lodge a complaint.

Accordingly, she lodged the complaint before the police. The

police registered the case in Crime No.19/2013 for the offence

punishable under Section 366 of IPC and Sections 12 and 18 of

the POCSO Act.

6.

After investigation, the charge sheet came to be

filed. The Trial Court framed the charge against the accused.

Accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

7.

In order to prove its case, the prosecution has

examined