IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1692/2019 (A)

BETWEEN:

THE STATE BY K.R.NAGAR POLICE STATION REPTD. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU – 560 001 …APPELLANT (BY SMT.SOWMYA R, HCGP)

AND:

1. MAHESHA S/O KUNTASINGRAIAH AGED 25 YEARS R/O SOUTHANAHALLI VILLAGE K.R. NAGAR TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT - 571602 Dig itally signed by K S 2. MANJUNAYAK RENUKAMBA S/O THAMMAIAYA NAYAK AGE: MAJOR Location:

OCC: AGRICULTURIST High Court of SOUTHANAHALLI VILLAGE Karnataka K.R.NAGAR TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.HEMANTH KUMAR S.R., ADVOCATE FOR R.1;

SMT.ARCHANA K M, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 378 (1)

AND (3) OF THE CR.PC. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 09.01.2019 PASSED BY THE VI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SPECIAL JUDGE, MYSURU IN S.C.NO.365/2014 ACQUITTING THE ACCUSED/RESPONDENT NO.1 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 366, 376(2)(i)

AND (n) OF IPC AND SECTION 5(l) READ WITH SECTION 6 OF POCSO ACT AND SECTION 9 OF THE PROHIBITION OF CHILD MARRIAGE ACT,2006.

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL)

Though the matter has come up for admission, with consent of both side, the matter is taken up for final disposal.

2. The State has preferred this appeal challenging the order of acquittal in SC No.365/2014 passed by VI Additional District and Special Judge, Mysuru.

3. By the impugned judgment and order, the trial Court has acquitted respondent No.1/accused of the charges for the offences punishable under Sections 366, 376(2)(i) and (n) of IPC and Section 5(l) read with Section 6 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short ‘POCSO Act’) and Section 9 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 (for short ‘Child Marriage Act’).

4. Respondent No.1 was the sole accused and respondent No.2 was complainant/PW.2 in SC No.365/2014 before the trial Court. For the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to henceforth according to their ranks before the trial Court.

5. Admitted facts are that PW.1 is the daughter of PWs.2 and 3. The case of the prosecution was that, as on 10.05.2014, PW.1 was aged 15 years. When she was studying in 9^th Standard, accused lured her of love and romance. On 10.05.2014 at 03:00 p.m, when she had accompanied her mother to State Bank of Mysuru in K.R Nagar, he kidnapped her from K.R Nagar and took her to Bylashettyhalli village, Nelamangala Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District. On 11.05.2014 at 01:00 p.m. he married her in Byla Anjaneyaswamy Temple situated in Bylashettyhalli village in the presence of PWs.4 and 5. Then he sexually cohabited with her in the rented house belonging to CW.11. Thereby, he committed the offences punishable under Sections 366, 376(2)(i) and (n) of IPC and Section 5(l) read with Section 6 of POCSO Act and Section 9 of Child Marriage Act.

6. According to the prosecution, regarding the incident, PW.2 filed complaint as per Ex.P4 before CW.31. Based on that, he registered FIR as per Ex.P16 against unknown person for the offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC. On the instruction of investigating officer/PW.11, on 29.06.2014 his staff traced and produced accused and victim before him. PW.11 on conducting part of investigation, handed over further investigation to PW.10. During the course of investigation, investigating officers said to have recorded the statements of the witnesses, subjected the victim and the accused to medical examination, collected the incriminating materials and filed charge sheet.

7. The trial Court on taking cognizance of the offences, framed the charges against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 366, 376(2)(i)