Karnataka High Court
The State Of Karnataka By vs Siddik @ Syed Siddik on 15 June, 2023
Bench: Sreenivas Harish Basavaraja, Gbj
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:20590-DB
CRL.A No. 1950 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1950 OF 2022
Between:
The State of Karnataka by
Hariharapura Police Station
Represented by State Public Prosecutor
High Court Building,
Bengaluru-560 001.
...Appellant
(By Smt. Rashmi Jadhav, HCGP)
And:
1. Siddik @ Syed Siddik
Digitally signed S/o. Nisar Ahamed
by C K LATHA Aged about 25 years,
Location: HIGH Ramanagara, N.R.Pura
COURT OF N.R.Pura Taluk - 577134
KARNATAKA
2. D.R.Imtiyaz
S/o. Abdul Raheem
Aged about 52 years,
R/o. Devaramane, Yadadati Village,
Hariharapura, Koppa Taluk,
Chikkamagaluru-577 126
...Respondents
(By Sri Mohan K.N., Advocate for R1;
R2 - served, unrepresented.)
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:20590-DB
CRL.A No. 1950 of 2022
This Criminal Appeal is filed u/s.378(1) (3) Cr.P.C.
praying to grant leave to appeal against the judgment and
order of acquittal dated 12.08.2021 passed in
Spl.C.No.45/2018 by the Additional District and Sessions Judge
(FTSC-1), Chikkamagaluru and thereby acquitting the
accused/respondent herein for the offence p/u/s 366(A), 343,
376(2)(N) of IPC and section 5(L), 6 of POCSO Act and etc.
This Criminal Appeal, coming on for admission, this day,
Sreenivas Harish Kumar J., delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
Heard Smt.Rashmi Jadhav, learned HCGP, for the
appellant/State on the admission of this appeal which has
arisen from the judgment of the Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru, in Special Case (POCSO)
No. 45/2018.
2. Respondent No.1/accused was tried for the
offences punishable under sections 366(A), 343, 376(2N)
of IPC and sections 5(L) and 6 of POCSO Act. The trial
court acquitted the accused of these offences finding that
the evidence of the witnesses, especially of the
prosecutrix, i.e., PW2 is not inspiring. The trial court has
NC: 2023:KHC:20590-DB
CRL.A No. 1950 of 2022
opined that there was no convincing evidence that PW2
was subjected to forcible sexual intercourse by the
accused.
3. Though Smt. Rashmi Jadhav argues that the trial
court has not properly appreciated the evidence of the
prosecutrix and the evidence of other witnesses, on
perusal of the judgment of the trial court we find that the
prosecutrix herself has not supported the prosecution
case. In the examination-in-chief she stated that the
accused had intercourse with her, but in the cross-
examination she refuted all the answers she gave in the
examination-in-chief and thereby has proved herself to be
not a trustworthy witness. Added to this, the mother of
the prosecutrix examined as PW5 has not supported the
prosecution case. Though the father examined as PW1
appears to have supported, in view of the fact that the
evidence of prosecutrix is not fully reliable, we are of the
opinion that the trial court has not committed any error in
acquitting the accused of the offences charged against
NC: 2023:KHC:20590-DB
CRL.A No. 1950 of 2022
him. Therefore we do not find any merit to admit the
appeal. Appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
CKL
