IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100727 OF 2025 U/S 14 A(2) of SC and ST ACT BETWEEN:

SRI. BHIMAPPA S/O SHIVANAND @ SHIVAPPA HANABAR @ VADRALE AGE: 23 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O: HIDKAL, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI, PIN CODE: 591 107.

...APPELLANT (BY SRI. SANTOSH B MALAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH PSI, HARUGERI POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDL STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SPP OFFICE, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD – 580 011.

2. FATHER OF THE VICTIM GIRL SHRI. BALAPPA PRADHANI GASTI, AGE: 45 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O: VALMIKI NAGAR, YABARATTI ROAD HARUGERI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI PIN: 591 220.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP FOR R1;

SRI. PRASHANT MATHAPATI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 14 A(2) OF SC AND ST (POA) ACT 1989 R/W 439 OF CR.P.C. R/W 483 OF BNSS, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 03.11.2025 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE DESIGNATED AS SPECIAL COURT FOR POCSO/II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE BELAGAVI, AT BELAGAVI IN CRL.MISC NO.1216/2025 AND ETC., THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 18.12.2025, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY, COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

CAV JUDGMENT

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH)

The appellant is the sole accused in Crime No.139/2025 registered by the respondent – Police for the offences punishable under Section 96, 87, 65(1), 64(2)(m) R/w 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and under Section 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012. And Sec 3(2), 3(2) (va), 3(1)(w) of Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.

Factual matrix of the case:

2. The case of the prosecution is that, the victim/complainant being a minor girl was studied up to 10^th Standard in the Government High School, Harugeri. She was residing along with her parents and she one sister and two brothers.

3. It is alleged that on 05.07.2025 at about 4.30 P.M., the victim went to Hanuman Temple. After performing pooja in the Hanuman Temple, while she was returning to her home after visiting the tailor shop around about 5.30 P.M., a goods vehicle came near her and the person from the said vehicle who was sitting next to the driver forcibly took her inside the vehicle and covered her face and kidnapped her.

4. It is further stated that around 7.00 P.M., the said goods vehicle came near a sugarcane field, they stopped the vehicle and took her to the said sugarcane field and the appellant had committed sexual assault on her. After committing the sexual assault, she was taken to the nearby place by the same accused/appellant and asked other two persons to drop her on the motorcycle. Accordingly, the other two persons dropped her and thereafter, she went to her house and narrated the incident. Immediately, she was taken to the BIMS Hospital, Belagavi. After obtaining treatment, she lodges a complaint against the unknown persons. The respondent – Police after having registered a case conducted investigation and submitted the charge-sheet.

5. Heard Shri. Santosh B. Malagoudar learned counsel for the petitioner and shri. Praveeen Y. Devareddiyavar for respondent state, And Shri Prashant Mathapati learned Counsel for Respondent No.2.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that, the appellant is innocent of the alleged offences and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The victim has not taken the names of the accused in her complaint. However, on

10.07.2025, she made her further statement before the respondent – Police stating that the appellant was known to her prior to the said incident. Further, on 21.07.2025, she made her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C and improved her version, and additionally added one more accused as accused No.2. This clearly creates doubt regarding the genuineness of the alleged offence. Therefore, the appellant may be enlarged on bail by