Karnataka High Court
The State By vs Panduranga Chowhan on 10 January, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:1105-DB
CRL.A No. 890 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 890 OF 2023
Between:
The State
By Inspector of Police,
Women Police Station,
Udupi District.
Represented by
State Public Prosecutor,
High Court Building,
Bengaluru - 560001.
...Appellant
(By Sri Thejesh P., HCGP)
Digitally signed And:
by VEERENDRA
KUMAR K M
Location: HIGH 1. Panduranga Chowhan
COURT OF S/o Ramesh,
KARNATAKA Aged about 27 years,
R/at Kamathagi,
Hunagunda Taluk,
Bagalkote District.
Present: Mahabala Shetty Compound,
Adkadakatte, Nittoor,
Udupi - 574118.
2. Smt. Shanthamma,
W/o Mallappa,
Aged about 49 years,
R/at Tenant of
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:1105-DB
CRL.A No. 890 of 2023
Sathish Pujari House,
Adkadakatte,
Nittur, Ambhagilu,
Udupi District-574118.
...Respondents
(By Sri Mohana Chandra P, Advocate for R1;
R2 - Served and Unrepresented)
This Criminal Appeal is filed under section 378(1) and (3)
Cr.P.C. praying to may be pleased to grant leave to appeal
against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 07.12.2022
in Special Case No.76/2018 passed by the Learned Additional
District and Sessions Judge FTSC-I, Udupi (Special Court for
trial of cases filed under POCSO Act) thereby acquitting the
accused respondent of the offence punishable under sections
376, 376(2)(n) of IPC and section 5(n), 5(j)(ii) read with
section 6 of POCSO Act 2012.
This Criminal Appeal, coming on for admission, this day,
Sreenivas Harish Kumar J., delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
Heard Sri Thejesh P, learned High Court
Government Pleader for the appellant/State on
admission of this appeal. Sri Mohana Chandra P,
learned counsel for respondent No.1/accused is
present.
NC: 2024:KHC:1105-DB
2. Respondent No.1 faced trial for the
offences punishable under Section 376 of IPC and
Sections 5(j)(ii) and 5(n) punishable under Section
6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act ('POCSO Act' for short). The trial
court acquitted him of the said offences.
3. The prosecution case is that respondent
No.1 subjected PW1 to repeated sexual
intercourse. She was a minor at that time. She
also conceived.
4. After assessing the evidence, the trial
court arrived at a conclusion that there was sexual
intercourse between respondent No.1 and PW1.
But the main reason for acquitting the
accused/respondent No.1 is that the age of PW1 as
on the date of the incident did not appear to be
below 18 years. Though the prosecution produced
two documents as per Exs.P14 and P15 to prove
that the age of PW1 was below 18 years, the trial
NC: 2024:KHC:1105-DB
court held that these documents could not be
relied upon inasmuch as Ex.P15 was found to have
not been maintained during the official duty of
PW7. Ex.P14 is just a certificate issued by the
Government Higher Primary School about the age
of the girl.
5. Referring to various judgments, the trial
court arrived at a conclusion that the prosecution
failed to prove that the age of the girl was below
18 years. The reasons given in this regard are
found in paragraphs 21 and 22 of the impugned
judgment. The prosecution is required to prove
the age of the victim girl, and unless she is found
to be minor, no offence can be said to have been
committed under the provisions of POCSO Act.
Though there was DNA matching of the fetus with
the blood samples of the accused, because of the
age of the girl having not been proved to be below
18 years, the trial court is justified in acquitting
NC: 2024:KHC:1105-DB
the accused and drawing a conclusion that it could
be a consensual intercourse. We do not find any
merit to admit this appeal. Therefore appeal is
dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
KMV
