IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1892 OF 2018 (A)

BETWEEN:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY POLICE INSPECTOR PANAMBUR POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001.

…APPELLANT (BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, H.C.G.P.)

AND:

1. THOUSIF @ ABUBAKER SIDDIQ S/O. LATE M. AHAMED AGED 28 YEARS RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.8/127 D igitally KANA, INDIRA KATTE, SURATHKAL POST signed by ANJALI M MANGALURU-575 014.

Location:

High Court 2. ZUBEDA of W/O. LATE KHASIM Karnataka AGED 44 YEARS RESIDING AT SUNDARA APARTMENT

1^ST FLOOR, DOOR NO.101 BRITTO LANE, FALNIR MANGALURU-575 001.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI KETHAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE, FOR SRI ABHISHEK MARLA, FOR R-1, AND SMT. POOJA KATTIMANI, ADVOCATE, FOR SRI DINESH KUMAR K. RAO, FOR R-2)

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378(1) AND (3) OF THE CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 26-4-2018 PASSED IN SPECIAL CASE NO.87 OF 2014 ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS (SPECIAL) JUDGE, D.K., MANGALURU, IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO ACQUITTING RESPONDENT NO.1-ACCUSED NO.1 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 366A, 376(2)(i) AND 506 OF IPC AND UNDER SECTION 4 OF POCSO ACT, AND IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO ACQUITTING RESPONDENT NO.2-ACCUSED NO.2 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 16 AND 17 OF POCSO ACT, AND ETC.

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH)

Heard Smt. Rashmi Patel, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the appellant-State, Sri Kethan Kumar, learned counsel appearing for Sri Abhishek Marla, learned counsel for respondent No.1-accused No.1, Smt. Pooja Kattimani, learned counsel for Sri Dinesh Kumar K. Rao, learned counsel for respondent No.2-accused No.2, and perused the material available on record.

2. This appeal is filed by the State against the judgment of acquittal dated 26.04.2018 passed by the II Additional District and Sessions (Special) Judge, D.K., Mangaluru, in Special Case No.87 of 2014 in so far as accused No.1 for the offences punishable under Sections 366A, 376(2)(i) and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, 'IPC') and under Section 4 the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, 'POCSO Act') and in so far as accused No.2 for the offences punishable under Sections 16 and 17 of POCSO Act, and prays to convict accused Nos.1 and 2 for the charges levelled against them.

3. The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that PW2, victim girl, aged about 16 years, lodged a complaint alleging that she had already passed 10^th Standard and she is living with her parents. She has stated that two years prior to the incident, while the victim was going to School, accused No.1, who is from the same locality and who is known to her, used to follow her and used to say that, he is loving her and she rejected his proposal. She has further stated that on the previous day of lodging the complaint i.e. on 12.06.2014 in the evening at about 5.00 p.m., she had been to Panambur Beach, accused No.1 followed her even there by saying he is loving her and requested her to come with him to Mangaluru. They stayed in the Beach up to 9.00 p.m. in the night. Believing the words of accused No.1, she went to Mangaluru along with him. In the night at about 11.00 p.m., accused No.1 brought her to a flat of accused No.2 near Athena Hospital and introduced accused No.2 as Zubeda as his relative. Further, accused No.2 encouraged the victim saying that she should not get frightened and asked accused No.1 and the victim to sleep in a room in her house. Accordingly, both of them slept in the room, after a while, accused No.1 committed sexual intercourse on the vic