Back
Love Affair Turns Legal Battle: Karnataka HC Stands Firm on Acquittal in Alleged POCSO Rape Case
In a ruling that underscores the critical need for in child sexual assault cases, the dismissed appeals by the State and the victim's mother, upholding the trial court's acquittal of accused Raghuveer. The division bench of Justice H.P. Sandesh and Justice Venkatesh Naik T emphasized that where the victim admits to a and medical findings contradict rape allegations, conviction under and cannot stand. Delivered on , the decision in highlights evidentiary hurdles in such sensitive matters.
From Village Romance to Bengaluru Kidnapping Claims
The case traces back to Ralahalli Village in Andhra Pradesh, where the victim, a teenager pursuing first PUC and claiming a birthdate of , met the accused, a local from the same community. Prosecution alleged that in , Raghuveer forced a love relationship despite her refusals, promising marriage. When the affair surfaced, her mother (PW2) intervened, sending the girl to her brother-in-law's (PW1) home in Bengaluru's Mallasandra.
On , the accused allegedly signaled her from outside PW1's house. She left claiming to visit a tailor and vanished, prompting PW1 to file a missing person complaint (Crime No. 369/2023) at Bagalagunte Police Station. The girl returned on after trips to Tirupati and Hyderabad, alleging forced sex in a Kamakshipalya room and abduction. Police added charges of kidnapping and rape, invoking POCSO after her statement. Trial court acquitted on , citing unproven age and lack of medical proof, leading to these appeals.
Prosecution Pushes for Reversal: Consent Irrelevant for Minors?
The State, via , argued the victim's consistent statements to police, doctor, and magistrate proved forcible abduction and rape by a known minor-obsessed accused. They stressed POCSO's protective intent, insisting her testimony alone sufficed and trial court erred in dismissing school records (Exs. P11, P12) proving her under-18 status. The mother, represented by , echoed this, highlighting PW1-PW3 evidence, PW9's tenancy confirmation, and urged application for guardian custody breach, regardless of "love."
Defence counsel countered with the victim's cross-examination admissions of prior roaming, sharing PW1's address, and eloping willingly—negating kidnapping force. Crucially, doctor PW10's report (Ex.P9) found , no injuries or intercourse signs, absent FSL corroboration. School records, per standards, were parent-sourced, not birth certificates, failing age proof.
Dissecting Evidence: No Force, No Rape, No Minor Proven
The bench meticulously re-appraised testimony, rejecting kidnapping under
:
"It is clear that both of them were loving each other and even roamed everywhere and only on her instance, the accused came near the house of P.W.1 and both of them eloped."
Victim PW3 admitted giving the address and leaving fearfully yet voluntarily on a bike with accused and friend, staying 1.5 hours in the room before further travels.
Medical evidence sealed the rape rejection:
"The evidence of the doctor P.W.10 is very clear that there is no any sign of subjecting her for sexual assault and no injuries are found and there was no any sign of sexual intercourse."
No external injuries,
contradicted claims. On age, citing
P. Yuvaprakash v. State
((2024) 17 SCC 684), the court prioritized birth certificates over school admissions (Exs.P11-P12 in Telugu, unverified per Section 94(2)
). No
or official age estimation followed doctor's consent note. As reported in legal circles, such gaps doom POCSO cases without
"independent
, such as...
."
Court's Sharp Insights: Quotes That Define the Verdict
-
On victim's conduct
:
"The Court has to take note of the conduct of the victim and she only called the accused and went along with him. The ingredients of Section 361 of
is missing."
-
POCSO evidentiary bar
:
"In cases under the
, where the victim does not support the prosecution and medical evidence does not corroborate the allegations, the case generally face a high probability of acquittal due to lack of evidence."
-
Age proof rigor
:
"Exs.P.11 and 12 does not come within the purview of criteria of
... the entry made in the school records cannot be believed in the absence of proof of the date of birth."
-
Holistic view
:
"It is important to note that the victim herself eloped with the accused and there was no any force of kidnapping and she herself called the accused and went along with him."
Appeals Dismissed: A Caution for Future Prosecutions
Both appeals were dismissed:
"Both the appeals are dismissed."
This reinforces that POCSO convictions demand robust proof—beyond victim say-so—especially against countervailing medicals and conduct evidence. Practically, it signals prosecutors to secure ossification tests, FSL reports, and prioritize
-compliant age documents early. For similar "romeo-juliet" elopements claimed as abduction-rape, courts will scrutinize consent, force, and corroboration, potentially shielding consensual teen acts from overreach while safeguarding true victims.
