IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.599 OF 2021 (C)

BETWEEN:

JAGADEESH BABU @ BABU S/O. LATE RAJANNA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS RESIDING AT ANTHARAGANGEPALYA KUDURU HOBLI, MAGADI TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-561 101.

…APPELLANT (BY SRI N.R. KRISHNAPPA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KUDUR POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Digitally HIGH COURT COMPLEX signed by BENGALURU-560 001.

ANJALI M Location:

2. SRI VENKATESH High Court of Karnataka S/O. HUCHAIAH AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS OCCUPATION: COOLIE RESIDING AT ANTHARAGANGEPALYA KUDURU HOBLI, MAGADI TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-561 101.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI RAHUL RAI K., H.C.G.P. FOR R-1;

SRI V.S. VINAYAKA, ADVOCATE, FOR R-2 (APPOINTED AS AMICUS CURIAE VIDE ORDER DATED 20-02-2025)

* * *

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 374(2) OF THE CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND ORDER OF SENTENCE DATED 26-02-2019 PASSED BY THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, RAMANAGARA, IN SPECIAL CASE NO.116 OF 2018, CONVICTING THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 4 OF POCSO ACT.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ)

This appeal is preferred by the convict, challenging the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed against him by the Court of I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ramanagara, in Special Case No.116/2018.

2. Vide impugned judgment and order, the trial Court has convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012, and sentenced him to undergo rigorous life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.25,000/-, in default, to undergo further six months of imprisonment.

3. We have heard the learned counsel Sri N.R.Krishnappa appearing for the appellant, learned HCGP Sri Rahul Rai appearing for the State and Sri V.S. Vinayaka, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for respondent No.2/father of victim. Perused the evidence and material on record.

4. The case of prosecution is that, about

4-5 months prior to 13.03.2018, when there was no one present in the house, accused knowing fully well that the victim girl is a minor, misbehaved with her and committed forcible penetrative sexual assault and impregnated her and thereby committed an offence under Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012.

5. Law was set into motion on a complaint lodged by the victim herself, marked as Ex.P1. It is stated that the victim is a resident of Antaragange palya, Kuduru Hobli, Magadi Taluk, Ramanagara District. Her mother is no more. She is residing along with her father and brother. Her father had left the house about 8 to 10 months prior, after quarrelling with the neighbours and he was living in the house of their relatives in Gunnagere Village. Hence, victim and her brother were residing in the house. About 4-5 months prior, victim's cousin sister's husband, Babu, i.e., the accused, started visiting the house when there was no one present and he developed a close acquaintance with her. He was misbehaving with her and in spite of her resistance, committed forcible sexual intercourse on her. He told he would marry her and not to disclose the incident to others. Hence, she did not reveal the incident to others. About one and half months prior, her sister, Jyothi, informed one Gangamma, a Anganvadi Teacher, noticing her fat stomach. The said Gangamma took her to Government Hospital, Kuduru, wherein the doctor who examined her told that she is 3 months pregnant. The matter was then informed to victim's brother and after 3 days, she was taken to Balamandira.

6. In Ex.P1, victim has stated that the accused is responsible for her to become pregnant and sought to take action agai