SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

KALABURAGI BENCH

DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA

CRIMINAL APPEAL No.200129/2015

BETWEEN:

NAGAPPA S/O SIDDAPPA BABANAGAR

AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER,

R/O MARAKABBANALLI VILLAGE,

TQ. B.BAGEWADI, DIST. VIJAYAPUR

… APPELLANT

(BY SRI S.S. MAMADAPUR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

HIGHER COURT BUILDING,

CIRCUIT BENCH, GULBARGA.

(BASAVAN BAGEWADI P.S.)

2.

AMOGEPPA

S/O HANAMANTHAPPA BISANAL

AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE

R/O BOMMANAHALLI,

TQ. B. BAGEWADI,

DIST. VIJAYAPUR-586115

(AMENDED V/O DATED 07.07.2022)

… RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI GURURAJ V. HASILKAR, HCGP FOR R1;

R2-SERVED)

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 374(2)

CR.P.C.,

PRAYING

TO

SET

ASIDE

THE

OF

R

2

CONVICTION AND ORDER OF SENTENCE DATED 14.10.2015

PASSED BY THE LEARNED II-ADDITIONAL SESSIONS AND

SPECIAL

JUDGE,

VIJAYAPUR,

IN

SPECIAL

POCSO

CASE

NO.32/2014 AND ACQUIT THE APPELLANT OF THE AFORESAID

OFFENCES.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE

COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

J U D G M E N T

Heard Sri S.S.Mamadapur, learned counsel for

the appellant and Sri Gururaj V. Hasilkar, learned High

Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1.

The present appeal is directed against the

judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed

in Special POCSO Case No.32/2014 on the file of II-

Additional Sessions and Special Judge, Vijayapur,

dated 14.10.2015.

3.

Facts in brief for disposal of the present

appeal are as under:

3

Case of the prosecution reveals that the victim

girl aged about 14 years, was acquainted with the

accused and he lured and kidnapped her and took her

to Asta village in Sangli District, where aunt of the

accused by name Smt. Seetabai had a house. In the

said house, the accused kept the victim girl for a

period of 15 days and everyday, he had forcible

sexual intercourse with her. Subsequently, she was

kept in another relative’s home at Tadalagi and

accused had forcible sexual intercourse with her.

The chargesheet papers reveal that the victim

girl was restored to the custody of her parents and

thereafter, her statement was recorded and the

chargesheet came to be filed for the offences

punishable under Sections 363 and 376 of IPC and

Section 5(1) of the Protection of Children from Sexual

Offences Act, 2012, (for short, hereinafter referred to

as ‘POCSO Act’). During the course of investigation,

4

the accused was apprehended and he was sent to

judicial custody.

4.

On receipt of chargesheet, the learned

Special Judge took cognizance for the aforesaid

offences and secured the presence of the accused and

after complying Section 207 of Cr.P.C., framed

charges. The accused pleaded not guilty and

therefore, the trial was held.

5.

In

order

to

prove

the

case

of

the

prosecution, in all, 14 witnesses were examined on

behalf of the prosecution as PWs.1 to 14 and 23

documentary evidence were relied upon by the

prosecution which were exhibited and marked as

Exs.P1 to P23. The documentary evidence were

comprised

of

spot

panchanama,

photographs,

complaint, medical report of the accused, victim’s

birth

certificate,

admission

register,

admission

5

application, transfer certificate, requisition of PSI,

statement

under

Section

164

of

Cr.P.C.,

FIR,

statement of witnesses, case sheet, MLC register,

extracts of MLC register, statements of PWs.12 and 13

and house extract.

6.

On conclusion of recording of the evidence

on behalf of the prosecution, the statement of the

accused as contemplated under Section 313 of

Cr.P.C., was recorded by the learned Special Judge.

In the said statement, the accused did not offer any

explanation of whatsoever for the alleged incident

except denying all the incriminating circumstances.

The accused did not choose to file any written

statement as is contemplated under Section 313(5) of

Cr.P.C., nor adduced any defence evidence to rebut

the presumption available to the prosecution under

Sections 29 and 30 of the POCSO Act.

6

7.

Thereafter, the learned Special Judge heard

the parties in detail and formulated two points and

holding the said points in the affirmative, passed an

order of conviction convicting the accused for the

offences punishable under Section 363 of IPC and

Section 5(1) of the POCSO Act punishable under

Section 6 of the POCSO Act and passed the sentence

as under:

“Accused is hereby sentenced to

undergo

rigorous

imprisonment

of

7

(seven) years for the offence punishable

U/s.363 of IPC and shall pay a fine of

Rs.5,000/-. In default of payment of fine,

he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a

period of 1½ months.

Further,

the

accused

is

hereby

sentenced

to

undergo

rigorous

imprisonment for a period of 10 (ten) years

for the offence punishable Sec.5(1) of

Protection of Child

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top