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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 41543

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
S RACHAIAH
SANJEEV PAUL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
CRL.A 415/2025



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 415 OF 2025 (C)

BETWEEN:

SANJEEV PAUL AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS S/O JANU PAUL R/A NO.20 1ST CROSS BYAPPANAHALLI BENGALURU CITY KARNATAKA-038 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. RAKSHITH R., ADVOCATE)

AND: Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DESHNUR Location:

HIGH BY BYAPPANAHALLI POLICE STATION COURT OF KARNATAKA RE BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARANATAKA, AT BANGALORE-560 001

2. RTD MAJOR BHAVAND CHIRANJAY NO.61,3RD CROSS RAGHAVENDRA COLONY CHAMARAJAPET BENGALURU CITY KARNATAKA-018 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.PUSHPALATHA B. ADDL. SPP FOR R1;

R2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION

374(2) CR.PC PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION DATED 23.01.2025 AND SENTENCE DATED 23.01.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (FTSC-IV) AT BANGALORE IN SPL.C.C.NO.204/2017 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 376(2)(f) AND (n) OF IPC AND SEC. 5(I), 5(n) R/W SECTION 6 OF POCSO ACT, 2012 AND ACQUIT THE APPELLANT.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant / accused No.1 being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 23.01.2025 in Spl.C.C No.204/2017 on the file of the learned Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, FTSC-IV at Bengaluru, wherein accused No.1 has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 376(2) (f) and (n) of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’) and Sections 5(l), 5(n) r/w Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act, 2012 (for short ‘POCSO Act’).

2. The ranks of the parties in the Trial Court henceforth will be considered as per their rankings in the Trial Court.

Factual matrix of the case is as under:

3. The case of the prosecution is that accused Nos.1 and 2 are the husband and wife. Both were residing at Bengaluru. Accused No.3 is the father of the victim and he is the cousin brother of accused No.2. The victim was brought to Bengaluru to take care of the children of accused Nos. 1 and 2. Accused No.2 was working as a sales girl and she used to go to work in the morning and was returning home at about 9.00 p.m. Her husband, who is accused No.1, was remaining at home and doing the work of preparing food as a caterer.

4. It is further stated that the victim girl was not only taking care of children of accused No.2, but also she was working as a maid. It is further stated that she has been subjected to sexual assault by accused No.1 on several occasions. In spite of brining the said fact to the notice of accused No.2, accused No.2 did not respond properly. Therefore, it is stated that on 22.12.2016, the victim left the house and boarded the bus to escape from the house of accused No.2. As the victim could not say anything to the bus conductor and also she did not have money to go to her native, the conductor took her to the nearest police station. Later, the police have taken her and joined her to Balakiyara Bala Mandira. In the meantime, accused No.2 had lodged a missing complaint of the victim with Baiyappanahalli police station on

29.12.2016.

5. It is further stated that, based on the complaint, the police have registered a case in Cr.No.362/2016. On 09.01.2017, the statement of the victim was recorded, thereafter, the victim was handed over to accused Nos.1 and 2.

6. It is further stated that Ms. Shanta Mallige, who was working in the said Balakiyara Bala Mandira, had called Byappanahalli Police Station and informed about sexual harassment committed to the victim by accused No.1. Again, the victim girl was secured and she was produced before the learned Magistrate to record her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. Accordingly, FIR in crime No.26/2017 was registered against accused Nos.1 to 3. Based on the statement of the victim, investigation was con

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