CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 306 OF 2026 (A)

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYAN N

Location: High Court of Karnataka

THIS CRL.A FILED U/S 378(1) AND (3) CR.PC (419(1) AND (3) OF BNSS) BY THE SPP AND CR.PC PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO: A. GRANT LEAVE TO APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED 05.11.2024 PASSED IN SPL.C NO.49/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-II (POCSO) AT DAKSHINA KANNADA, MANGALURU ACQUITTING THE ACCUSED RESPONDENTS FOR THE CHARGED OFFENCES U/S 376AB OF IPC AND SECTION 6 OF POCSO ACT 2012; B. SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED 05.11.2024 PASSED IN SPL.C NO .49/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-II (POCSO) AT DAKSHINA KANNADA, MANGALURU BY ALLOWING THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL; AND ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G. BASAVARAJA)

1. Appellant-State has preferred this appeal against the judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 05th November, 2024, passed in Spl.C.No.49 of 2024 by the Court of Additional District & Sessions, Judge/FTSC-II (POCSO), Dakshina Kannada, Mangaluru.

2. There is a delay of 349 days in preferring the appeal. Application under Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963 is filed seeking to condone the delay.

3. Application is supported by the affidavit of Sri B P. Manjunatha, in-charge Deputy Director of Prosecution, Litigation-1, Office of Director of Prosecutions and Government Litigations, Bengaluru. In the affidavit, it is stated that the judgment and order in Spl.C.No.49 of 2024 was passed by Additional District & Sessions Court, Dakshina Kannada, Mangaluru on 5th November, 2024. The Special Public prosecutor who has conducted the case has applied for certified copies of the judgment on 6th November, 2024 and received the same on 28th November, 2024. He sent his opinion on 30th November, 2024 to the Law Officer (Senior), and the Law officer sent his opinion on 07th December, 2024 to the Director of Prosecutions and Government Litigations, which was received by the head office on 2nd January, 2025. Then the Additional Director of Prosecutions has given her opinion on 18th January, 2025, and the opinion file has been sent to Joint Director of Prosecutions, Litigation-1, and she has given her opinion on 20th January, 2025, and the file has been sent to the Government on the next day for final decision, since all have opined that it was a fit case for preferring appeal. The Government also opined the same and on 20th August 2025, vide letter No.HD:4607:HCP-1:2025, authorised the State Public Prosecutor to prefer the appeal. It is further stated that the file was required to pass through the trial Court, Public prosecutor, Law officer (Senior), Mysore Division, office of the Director of Prosecutions and Government Litigations, before passing an order to prefer appeal against the impugned judgment, and hence the delay has been caused due to above reasons. It is further stated that the delay is not intentional, but for the above stated, bona fide reasons. Hence, it is sought to condone the delay.

4. Memorandum of facts has been filed by the learned High Court Government Pleader, wherein it is stated that the Government has issued sanction order to prefer an appeal before this Court, which was received by Office of the Advocate General on 9th March, 2025. It is stated that the said papers were allocated to he