IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2020

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1959 OF 2019

Between:

Sri Paramesha

S/o Siddaiah

Aged about 29 years

R/at Babbagalale Village

Arakalgud Taluk

Hassan District-34. ...Appellant

(By Sri Pratheep K.C, Advocate)

And:

State of Karnataka

By Circle Inspector of Police

Arakalgud Circle

Hassan District

Rep. by its State Public Prosecutor

High Court of Karnataka

Bangalore-01.

... Respondent

(By Sri R.D.Renukaradhya, HCGP)

This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374(2) of

Cr.P.C., praying to set aside the judgment dated 23.10.2019

and sentence dated 24.10.2019 passed by the Additional

District and Sessions and Special Judge, Hassan in

Spl.C.No.146/2014, convicting the appellant/accused for the

offence punishable under Sections 448, 376 of IPC and

Section 6 of POCSO Act and etc.,

This Criminal Appeal coming on for Orders this day,

the Court delivered the following:

R

- 2 -

J U D G M E N T

The present appeal has been preferred by the

appellant-accused

challenging

the

judgment

of

conviction and order of sentence passed by the

Additional Sessions and Special Judge, Hassan in

Special Case No.146/2014 dated 23/24.10.2019.

2.

I have heard Sri Pradeep K.C, the learned

counsel

for

the

appellant-accused

and

Sri

Renukaradhya, the learned High Court Government

Pleader for the respondent-State.

3.

The case of the prosecution in brief is that

eight months prior to 15.11.2014 at about 2.00 p.m.

when the victim alone was there in her residence, the

accused came knowing well that the victim is minor by

enticing her sexually assaulted her and subsequently,

he has threatened her with dire consequences if she

discloses the said incident to anybody. It is further

alleged that in the month of March 2014 again accused

- 3 -

approached and had sexually assaulted the victim and

as a result of the same, the victim conceived and when

she has been taken to the hospital, the same has been

confirmed and on 15.11.2014 the victim delivered a

female child. On the basis of the said complaint, a case

has been registered. After the investigation, the charge

sheet has been filed. The Special Court took the

cognizance after serving the copies of the charge sheet

and after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor and the

learned counsel for the accused, the charge was read

over and explained to the accused. The accused pleaded

not guilty. He claimed to be tried and as such, the trail

was fixed.

4.

In order to prove its case, the prosecution

has got examined eight witnesses and got marked 17

documents. After closure of the evidence of the

prosecution the accused was examined under Section

313 of Cr.P.C. by putting incriminating material as

against him. The accused denied the same and he has

- 4 -

not chosen to lead any evidence on his behalf.

Subsequently, an application came to be filed under

Section 216 of Cr.P.C. for amendment of charge and

after hearing both side, the charge was altered and the

prosecution has not led further evidence and relied on

the evidence which has been already lead and after

hearing the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned

counsel for the accused, the trial Court convicted the

accused for the offences punishable under Sections 448

and 376 of IPC and also under Section 6 of the

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (herein

after referred to as ‘Act’ for short). Challenging the

legality and correctness of the said judgment of

conviction and order of sentence, the appellant-accused

is before this Court.

5.

The main grounds urged by the learned

counsel for the appellant-accused are that though all

the material witnesses have not supported the case of

the prosecution, the trial Court only by r