SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 55096

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2022

BEFORE

THE HON9BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1274 OF 2019

BETWEEN:

Sri Manoj Kumar M

Son of Manjunath

Presently aged about 26 years

Residing at No.30/4

Sneha Nandini Apartments

Dollar Colony Scheme

Nandini Layout

Bengaluru-560 096.

&Appellant

(By Sri Tomy Sebastian, Senior Advocate for

Melanie Sebastian, Advocate)

AND:

State of Karnataka

By Mahalakshmi Layout P.S.

Bengaluru City

Represented by

The State Public Prosecutor

High Court Buildings

Bengaluru-560 001.

&Respondent

(By Sri K. Nageshwarappa, HCGP)

This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374(2)

of Cr.P.C. praying to set aside the judgment dated

11.06.2019, and sentence dated 13.06.2019, passed

by the LIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge,

CCH-55, sitting in Child Friendly Court, Bengaluru

:: 2 ::

Urban District, in Spl.C.C. No.46/2014, convicting the

appellant/accused for the offence punishable under

Sections 376, 306 of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act.

This

Criminal

Appeal

having

been

heard

&

reserved

on

28.07.2022,

coming

on

for

pronouncement this day, the Court pronounced the

following:

The accused in Special C.C.46/2014 on the

file of LIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Court

and Child Friendly Court, Bengaluru, has preferred

this

appeal

challenging

the

judgment

of

his

conviction

the

offences

punishable

under

sections 306 and 376(3) IPC read with section 6 of

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act

(8POCSO Act9 for short).

2. Precisely stated, the prosecution case is

that the accused introduced himself to the girl via

social media (e-mail ID and face book), developed

friendship, allured and seduced her to gratify his

sexual desire. When he refused to marry her, she

committed suicide on 5.11.2013. The girl9s age

:: 3 ::

was about 14 years; and she was a student of 9th

standard. The father of the girl (PW1) made a

report

of

this

incident

to

the

police.

The

investigation led to accused being charge sheeted

for the offences punishable under sections 376,

306 and 201 IPC, and section 5 (l) read with

section 6 of POCSO Act. Charges were framed for

the same offences. At the conclusion of trial, the

trial court while acquitting the accused of the

offence under section 201 IPC convicted him for

the offences punishable under section 376(3) IPC

read with section 6 of POCSO Act and section 306

IPC. He was sentenced to 3 years of simple

imprisonment and fine of Rs.15,000/- with default

sentence of three months for the offence under

section 306 IPC; and rigorous imprisonment for 20

years besides fine of Rs.25,000/- with default

sentence of simple imprisonment for one year for

the offence under section 376(3) IPC read with

section

6

of

POCSO

Act.

The

sentence

of

:: 4 ::

imprisonment for both the offences was directed to

run concurrently.

3. On the conclusion of trial, in order to

convict the accused for the offences punishable

under section 376(3) IPC read with section 6 of

POCSO Act and section 306 IPC, the trial court has

recorded the following reasons : -

3.1. The evidence of PWs1, 2, 3 to 5, 7, 8,

10, 20, 22 and 29 in regard to allegations made in

the first information report given to the police and

the death note is material. Though the oral

evidence of PW1 and PW2 and other circumstantial

witnesses is not impressive to establish that they

were aware of the friendship between the accused

and the girl as they came to know about it only

after seeing the death note, the evidence of PW1

and 2 in regard to other aspects of the matter is

believable. It is held by the trial court that the

evidence of PW1 and PW2 that when they observed

:: 5 ::

their daughter on 1.11.2013, she appeared upset

and when they questioned her, she told them

about her being in contact with the accused and

she had given the phone number to him, is not

seriously

contested

and

contradicted

by

the

defence. In this view, the death note left behind

by the girl as per Ex.P11 becomes material.

Extracting the contents of Ex.P11, it is further held

by

the

trial

court

that

it

has

remained

unchallenged. If the cross-examination of PW1 to

8 is considered, it appears that the defence has

made no attempt to deny the death note. Thus

the contents of Ex.P11 reveal that the person who

was responsible for sexual act leading to suicide

committed by the girl was Manoj Kumar s/o

Manjunath who was residing in Bengaluru in his

aunt9s house and studying in II Year B.Com in

Sheshadripuram

College.

These

facts

clearly

establish the identity of the accused. It is further

held that the death note also indicates that the

:: 6 ::

girl was subjected to intercourse more than once

and thereby the offence under section 5(l) read

with section 6 of the POCSO Act is established and

therefore the accused can be held guilty.

4. I have heard the arguments of Sri. Tomy

Sebastain, learned Senior Counsel appearing for

Melaine Sebastain for the appellant/accused and

Sri.

K.Nageshwarappa,

learned

HCGP

the

respondent.

5. The points that the learned counsel argued

will be referred to later, but their arguments give

rise to following points for discussion:

(i)

I

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top