Karnataka High Court
Sri Bolaka Choma @ P T Choma vs State Of Karnataka on 27 October, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:43210
CRL.A No. 1056 of 2022
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1056 OF 2022 (C)
BETWEEN:
SRI. BOLAKA CHOMA @ P.T. CHOMA
S/O. LATE THOLA,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
LABOURER,
C/O. KELAPANDA VISHWANATH
@ VINU LINE HOUSE,
KOLTHODU BYGODU VILLAGE,
VIRAJPET TALUK,
KODAGU DISTRICT-571218.
Digitally signed ...APPELLANT
by SAMREEN
AYUB (BY SRI. TEJAS N., ADVOCATE)
DESHNUR
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
AND:
KARNATAKA
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY:
CIRCLE POLICE INSPECTOR,
VIRAJPET CIRCLE,
KODAGU DISTRICT-571 218.
(REPRESENTED BY
LEARNED STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HCK, BANGALORE-01).
...RESPONDENT
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:43210
CRL.A No. 1056 of 2022
HC-KAR
2. SMT. KAVERI P.K.,
W/O. LATE. KULIYA,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
R/AT: C/O. KELAPANDA VISHWANATH @
VINU LINE HOUSE,
KOLTHODU BYGODU VILLAGE,
VIRAJPET TALUK,
KODAGU DISTRICT-571218.
...PROPOSED RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. PUSHPALATHA B., ADDL. SPP FOR R1;
SRI. KUMARA K.G., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
374(2) CR.P.C., PRAYING TO, SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND
ORDER OF CONVICTIONS DATED 30.08.2021 AND SENTENCE
DATED 02.09.2021 PASSED IN SPECIAL CASE NO.5002/2019
ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
JUDGE, KODAGU - MADIKERI, SITTING AT VIRAJPET IN WHICH
THE APPELLANT HAS BEEN FOUND GUILTY FOR OFFENCES
UNDER SECTIONS 376(2)(J)(N), 376 AB OF I.P.C. AND UNDER
SECTIONS 4 AND 6 OF POCSO ACT AND CONSEQUENTLY,
ACQUIT THE APPELLANT ACCUSED FORM THE CHARGES AND
HE MAY BE SET AT LIBERTY, IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:43210
CRL.A No. 1056 of 2022
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This appeal is arising out of judgment of conviction dated
30.08.2021 and order on sentence dated 02.09.2021
passed in S.C No.5002/2019 on the file of II Additional
District and Sessions Judge, Kodagu-Madikere, Sitting at
Virajpet, wherein the appellant /accused has been
convicted for the offences punishable under Sections
376(2)(j)(n), 376 AB of Indian Penal Code (for short
'IPC') and Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children
from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short 'POCSO Act').
2. The ranking of the parties in the Trial Court, henceforth
will be considered as per their rankings in the Court for
convenience.
Factual matrix of the case:
3. The case of the prosecution is that, on 06.12.2018 the
complainant noticed a small bump on the stomach of her
daughter, enquired her. She revealed the fact that the
appellant herein had committed sexual assault on her
when she was alone at home on several occasions.
Consequently, she became pregnant for eight months. A
NC: 2025:KHC:43210
HC-KAR
complaint came to be registered against the appellant,
the respondent police registered a case in Crime
No.137/2018 for the offences stated supra. After
conducting investigation, submitted the charge sheet.
The Trial Court convicted the appellant for the offences
stated supra.
4. Heard Sri.Tejas, learned counsel for the appellant and
Smt.Pushpalatha B, learned Additional SPP for respondent
No.1 - State and Sri.Kumara K.G, learned counsel for
respondent No.2.
5. It is the submission of learned counsel for the appellant
that the judgment of conviction and order on sentence
passed by the Trial Court is contrary to the evidence on
record.
6. It is further submitted that the evidence of PW.1 would
indicate that she has not supported the case of the
prosecution and her evidence has not been properly
considered by the Trial Court. The admission made by
the witness ought to have been considered by the Trial
Court. Having not considered the same, resulted in
NC: 2025:KHC:43210
HC-KAR
passing the impugned judgment which is liable to be set
aside. Making such submissions, the learned counsel for
the appellant prays to allow the appeal.
7. Per contra, the learned Additional SPP vehemently
contended that the appellant has committed the offence
on the victim, who was a minor and responsible for
delivering the baby. The DNA test would indicate that he
is the biological father of the child. As there are no
infirmities in the findings of the Trial Court, it is not
appropriate to allow the appeal. Making such
submissions, she prays to dismiss the appeal.
8. The learned counsel for respondent No.2 submitted that
the Trial Court has rightly considered the evidence of all
the witnesses and passed the judgment, which is not
liable to be set aside.
9. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective
parties and also perused the evidence of PW.1, it appears
from the record that, she has not supported the case of
the prosecution. She admitted that she joined the school
when she was 10 years and further admitted that her age
NC: 2025:KHC:43210
HC-KAR
was 22 years. She further admitted that appellant and
herself married each other and they are having a child.
She further admitted that she had not made any
statement before her mother that she had been subjected
to sexual assault by the appellant.
10. When the victim herself stated that she had not been
subjected to sexual assault and PW.2 - Doctor also
admitted that she had not conducted any examination to
determine the age of the victim, the findings of the Trial
Court, in my considered view, is erroneous and not
proper. Hence, the judgment of conviction is liable to be
set aside.
11. In the light of the observation made above, I proceed to
pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The Criminal Appeal is allowed.
(ii) The judgment of conviction dated
30.08.2021 and order on sentence dated
02.09.2021 in Special Case No.5002/2019
on the file of II Additional District and
NC: 2025:KHC:43210
HC-KAR
Sessions Judge, Kodagu at Madikere, Sitting
at Virajpet, is set aside.
(iii) The appellant is acquitted for the offences
punishable under Sections 376(2)(j)(n),
376AB of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of
POCSO Act.
(iv) Bail bond executed, if any, stands cancelled.
(v) The Registry is directed to communicate this
order to the concerned jail authority
forthwith.
(vi) In view of disposal of main appeal, pending
applications, if any, stands disposed of.
Sd/-
(S RACHAIAH)
JUDGE
UN/CT: UMD
