[Cites 17, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Ranganath Vaddappa Ghanti vs State Of Karnataka on 3 February, 2026
Author: V.Srishananda
Bench: V.Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486
CRL.A No. 100254 of 2017
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100254 OF 2017 (C)
BETWEEN:
RANGANATH VADDAPPA GHANTI,
AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
R/O: MUDAKAVI VILLAGE,
TQ: RAMDURG, DIST: BELAGAVI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. K.L. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH, AT DHARWAD,
THROUGH RAMDURG POLICE STATION.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. JAIRAM SIDDI, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 374(2) OF
CR.P.C., PRAYING TO SECURE THE RECORDS AND TO ALLOW THE
Digitally signed by
CHANDRASHEKAR APPEAL AND INTURN SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION
LAXMAN
KATTIMANI
Location: High AND ORDER SENTENCE DATED 13.07.2017 PASSED IN SESSIONS
Court of Karnataka,
Dharwad Bench.
CASE NO. 147 OF 2016 BY III ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE
AND SPECIAL COURT UNDER POCSO ACT, 2012, BELAGAVI AND TO
ACQUIT THE APPELLANT / ACCUSED FROM THE ALLEGED OFFENCES
UNDER SECTION 376 READ WITH 511 OF IPC AND SEC. 4 AND 6 OF
READ WITH 18 OF POCSO ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING,
THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486
CRL.A No. 100254 of 2017
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA)
Heard Sri K.L.Patil, learned counsel for appellant and Sri
Jairam Siddi, learned High Court Government Pleader for
respondent.
2. Appellant is the accused in S.C.No.147/2016 who
suffered an order of conviction for offence punishable under
Section 323, 307, 376 IPC and Section 4 and 6 read with Section
18 of the of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences
(POCSO) Act, 2012 ('POCSO Act', for short) and sentenced as
under:
"The accused is sentenced to under go rigorous
imprisonment for 5 years and to pay the fine of
Rs.6,000/- for the offence punishable under Sec. 376 R/W
Sec.511 of IPC.
In default to pay the fine amount, accused shall
under go simple imprisonment for two months.
The accused is sentenced to under go simple
imprisonment for 35 years and to pay the fine of
Rs.2,500/- for the offence punishable under Sec.4 R/w
Sec.18 of POCSO Act.
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486
HC-KAR
In default to pay the fine amount, accused shall
under go simple imprisonment for one months.
The accused is sentenced to under go rigorous
imprisonment for 5 years and to pay the fine of
Rs.6,000/- for the offence punishable under Sec.6 R/w
Sec.18 of POCSO Act.
In default to pay the fine amount, accused shall
under go simple imprisonment for two months.
The substantial sentence of imprisonment shall run
concurrently.
The accused is entitled for the benefit of set off as
provided under Sec. 428 of Cr.P.C. for the period for
which, he was in judicial custody in respect of this case.
Out of the fine amount, if paid, a sum of
Rs.10,000/- is ordered to be paid to Victim girl, through
her minor guardian father, Sri Vijaya Laxmana
Yaragannavara, as compensation.
Since the above compensation awarded to the
victim girl is inadequate and she may get the same, only
when fine was paid by the accused, acting under Sec.
457(A) of Cr.P.C., victim girl is directed to approach the
District Legal Services Authority, Belagavi to get the
additional compensation under the victim compensation
scheme.
Office to furnish the copy of this judgment to the
accused free of cost, forth with."
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486
HC-KAR
3. Facts of the case in nutshell which are utmost
necessary for disposal of the present appeal are as under:
3.1 Upon the complaint lodged by Vijay Laxman
Yaragannavar (PW1), Ramdurg Police registered a case in Crime
No.52/2016 on 16.02.2016 for the offences under Section 376
IPC and Section 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act.
3.2 Gist of the complaint averments would reveal that
accused had forcible sexual intercourse with the daughter of the
complainant aged 4 ½ years on 15.02.2016 by gagging her
mouth.
3.3 Police after registering the case thoroughly
investigated the matter and filed charge sheet. Presence of the
accused was secured and charges were framed. Accused pleaded
not guilty. Therefore, trial was held.
3.4 In order to prove the case of the prosecution, in all,
twelve witnesses were examined comprising of complaint, punch
witnesses, doctor examined the accused as well as the victim girl
and the Investigation Officers and nineteen documentary
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486
HC-KAR
evidence were placed on record which were exhibited and
marked as Exs.P1 to P19 besides marking nine material objects.
4. On conclusion of recording of evidence, learned trial
Judge recorded the accused's statement wherein accused has
denied all the incriminatory materials and thereafter heard the
arguments of the parties and convicted the accused and
sentenced as referred to supra.
5. Being aggrieved by the same, appellant is before this
Court in this appeal on following grounds.
That, the Accused/Appellant is innocent person and
hasnot committed any of the offences as alleged
and is entitled to be acquitted from the charges
leveled against him, by setting aside judgment of
conviction and order of sentence passed against
him by the trial Court.
On perusal of entire evidence on record it will
discloses that, there is no believable evidence
against the Appellant for the proof of the charges
leveled against them.
The reasoning assigned by the trial Court in
concluding that, the Prosecution has proved beyond
all reasonable grounds, that, the Accused/Appellant
has committed the offences and are found guilty for
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486
HC-KAR
the offences punishable U/ss. 376 R/w. 511 of IPC
and U/sec. 4 and 6 R/w. 18 of POCSO Act, are not
legally acceptable one and judgment of conviction is
required to be set aside.
That, on perusal of the contents of the judgment, it
discloses that, the trial Court erred mainly relying
on the evidence of Prosecution, came to the
conclusion that, the accused person has committed
the alleged offence.
That, on perusal of the document Ex-P13 it clearly
discloses that, there are no external injuries on the
body of the victim girl. This fact makes it clear that,
there is no possibility of committal of the alleged
offence by the Appellant.
On perusal of the document Ex-P13, it makes it
clear that, all the external genitalia are normal as
per the parameters. Hence this fact makes it clear
that, the question of committing the alleged offence
is doubtful in nature.
That, it is pertinent to note that, the medical
reports are not supported the case of the
Prosecution in order to prove the alleged offence
U/sec. 376 of IPC and offences under the provisions
of the POCSO Act.
That, except the complainant, there is no
corroborative evidence to show that the Appellant
has committed the alleged offences.
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486
HC-KAR
On perusal of the entire evidence on record it
nowhere discloses the specific overt act of the
Appellant in order to convict for the alleged
offences.
That, it is pertinent to note that, specific allegations
against the Appellant are not forthcoming in the FIR
as well as the complaint. This fact makes it clear
that, the Appellant is not present at the time of the
alleged incident and is nowhere concerned to the
alleged incident.
The other witnesses have not supported the case of
the Prosecution. Hence, proving of the allegations
and charges against the Appellant by prosecution
beyond reasonable doubt is legally not acceptable
one and cannot be taken into consideration.
That, on perusal of the entire evidence on record
including the contents of the charge sheet it
nowhere discloses the specific overtact of the
Appellant in the alleged incident.
That, on perusal of the documents on record as well
as the charge sheet, it nowhere discloses the name
of the present Appellant even in the allegations and
also in the statement recorded by the investigation
officer.
On perusal of the evidence on record it nowhere
discloses the name of the Appellant in any evidence
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486
HC-KAR
or depositions deposed by the Prosecution
witnesses and also his specific overtact.
It is pertinent to note that, in the absence of the
specific identification of the Appellant in the alleged
incident and also the specific overtact, conviction of
the Appellant is legally not sustainable and is liable
to be set aside.
The evidence on record if taken together it gives
the clear picture that there are number of
contradictions and they are not corroborative to
each other and even the evidence of informant does
not corroborate the contents of Ex-P1 Complaint.
On perusal of the evidence on record it gives the
picture that, there is no clarity in the investigation
as required and with an intention to bring an end to
the investigation the name of the Accused person is
included in this case on unbelievable allegations
and facts.
The reasoning's assigned by the trial Court in
coming to the conclusion is not legally acceptable
one so as to convict the Accused person.
The trial Court erred in believing the evidence of
Prosecution and in passing judgment of conviction
and the sentence awarded is also appears to be
harsh one.
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486
HC-KAR
The evidence of the Prosecution is not beyond
reasonable doubt so as to convict the Accused
person.
6. Sri K.L.Patil, learned counsel for the appellant
reiterating the grounds urged in the appeal memorandum
vehemently contended that the testimony of PW1-complainant
and the victim girl are not sufficient to bring home the guilt of
the accused inasmuch as victim was aged 6 years at the time of
recording the evidence and at the time of incident, she was aged
about 4 ½ years.
7. He further contended that the oral testimony of
PW10 (victim girl) is artificial as victim at that age is not in a
position to specifically depose about the male part being
introduced into female part and it looks that it is a tutored
testimony and therefore, sought for allowing the appeal.
8. He would also contend that in the absence of
requirement of the substantial evidence of male part being
introduced into the female part to any extent, offence under
Section 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act cannot be attracted and
- 10 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486
HC-KAR
convicting the appellant with the aid of Section 18 of POCSO Act
is impermissible.
9. He would further argue that the medical report of the
victim girl do not corroborate with the oral testimony would not
be sufficient to maintain the conviction of the accused and
sought for allowing the appeal.
10. Per contra, Sri Jairam Siddi, learned High Court
Government Pleader would contend that the RFSL report was
received by the doctor and thereafter final opinion has been
obtained which would make it clear that there were seminal
stains and blood detected in the samples which would
conclusively establish the ingredient to attract the offence
punishable under Section 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act and sought
for dismissal of the appeal.
11. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court
perused the material on record meticulously.
- 11 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486
HC-KAR
12. On such perusal of the material on record, in the light
of the arguments put forth on behalf of the parties, following
points would arise for consideration.
i. Whether the prosecution has established all
ingredients to attract the offences punishable
under Section 376 IPC and Section 4 and 6 read
with Section 18 of the POCSO Act?
ii. Whether the impugned judgment is suffering from
legal infirmity or perversity and thus calls for
interference?
iii. Whether the sentence is excessive?
iv. What order?
Regarding Points (i) and (ii):-
13. In the case on hand, acquaintance of the accused
with the complainant and the victim girl is established as victim
girl herself has specifically stated the name of the accused while
complaining the incident to PW1. Further, as on the date of
incident, victim girl was aged about 4 ½ years and at the time of
deposing before the Court, she was aged 6 years.
- 12 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486
HC-KAR
14. On perusal of the complaint averments and the
statement recorded by the jurisdictional Magistrate under
Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter
referred to as 'the Cr.P.C.') of the victim girl, make it clear that
she was worldly wise and was in a position to answer the
questions put by the trial Magistrate logically. Further, merely
mentioning the name of the male part and the female part in the
examination-in-chief itself cannot be treated as tutoring of the
victim girl (PW10).
15. She has specifically deposed before the Court about
the incident and accused entering the house, removing the
clothes worn by the victim girl and snatching away the plate
where she was consuming the lunch and also pressing the neck.
She also deposed about intimating the incident to her father and
later on taken to the hospital.
16. In her cross-examination, she has answered that she
would return from the school at about 02:00 p.m. and usually
lunch would be served in the school. She admits that she
consumes her lunch every day in the school and used to take
dinner in the house. She has also answered that she was living in
- 13 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486
HC-KAR
the house along with her elder sister and younger brother. She
further answered that she used to be present near the place of
construction of the house soonafter the school. Complainant is
PW1, who is the father of the victim girl. She has been intimated
about the incident by the victim girl herself and a case came to
be filed.
17. Medical examination of the victim girl would reveal
that results which would corroborate with the testimony of the
victim girl and the complainant.
18. RFSL report specifically mentions the presence of
seminal and blood stains in the sample. DNA profiling has also
been conducted in the samples which tallies with the samples
collected by the investigation agency from the body of the
accused.
19. In the absence of any strong motive as to falsely
implicate the accused in the incident, material evidence placed
on record has been rightly appreciated by the learned trial Judge
while recording the order of conviction for the aforesaid offences.
- 14 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486
HC-KAR
20. In a matter of this nature, usually the oral testimony
of the victim would prevail over other circumstances. However,
taking note of the fact that the victim was aged 4 ½ years at the
time of incident and 6 years at the time of deposing before the
Court, as a rule of caution, corroboration is looked for by the trial
Judge and by this Court in the light of the arguments put forth
on behalf of the appellant.
21. On exercising such caution while re-appreciating the
material evidence on record, this Court noted that corroboration
for the oral testimony of the victim girl is not only through the
oral testimony of PW1, but also through the attendant
circumstances including the place of incident and the medical
evidence. Medical examination report of the victim girl marked at
Exhibit P13 is provisional in nature, as samples were collected
from the body of the victim girl, including the vaginal swab, and
same was sent to RFSL for examination and report. The RFSL
report is found at Exhibit P19. On perusal of the RFSL report, the
final opinion is forwarded by the Doctor vide Exhibit P14.
22. On perusal of Exhibit P14, Doctor who examined the
victim girl, it is crystal clear that seminal stains were detected in
- 15 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486
HC-KAR
the cloth, which is cloth namely 'langa' (Skirt), and under
garment of the victim girl and knicker of the accused. Blood
stains were detected on the langa, blouse and underwear of the
victim girl and DNA particle of seminal stains detected in langa,
blouse and knicker. The DNA report also tallied with the sample
collected from the accused, and the medical report that was filed
earlier vide Exhibit P13 mentions no injury on the other parts of
the body. Hymen was also found to be intact and there were no
external injuries on the labia majora and labia minora.
23. No vaginal discharge is noticed from the victim girl.
Therefore, the learned trial Judge has rightly convicted the
accused under Section 4 read with Section 18 of the POCSO Act,
in other words, it was an attempted a penetrative sexual assault.
24. Thus, on totality of the circumstances, if the
prosecution evidence is re-appreciated having regard to the
presence of the seminal stains and blood stain on the clothes
worn by the victim girl, namely langa, under garments and the
blouse, what can be inferred is that there was ejaculation by the
accused, but it was not into vagina.
- 16 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486
HC-KAR
25. Taking note of the fact that there are no external
injuries and hymen being intact, at the most, accused tried to
penetrate into the female part of the victim girl, but failed in
doing so and ejaculated on the clothes worn by the victim.
Therefore, learned trial Judge recording a finding that it is a
failed attempt of the accused to have a penetrative sexual
assault is founded on the logical and good reasons, which
requires no interference even after the re-appreciation of the
material evidence. Accordingly, in the view of the foregoing
discussion, point No.(i) is answered in the affirmative and point
No.(ii) negative.
Regarding point No.(iii):
26. In the case on hand, the accused was aged 28 years
and working as a coolie. He utilised the loneliness of the victim
girl and tried to mis-utilise her, who was aged only 4 ½ years at
the time of incident. The greed and lust of the accused is
apparent in the case on hand and in that regard, he did not have
the minimum courtesy, at least considering the age of the victim
girl, and attempted to have a penetrative sexual assault with the
- 17 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486
HC-KAR
victim girl, which establishes the manifestation of the animus in
him resulting in brutality.
27. Sri.Jairam Siddi, learned High Court Government
Pleader, however, contended that the sentence is on the lower
side and sought for enhancement.
28. In an appeal filed by the accused, there is no scope
for enhancement of the sentence. This Court, in the case of
Gousmodin S/o Abdulrehaman Mulla v. State of
Karnataka1, noting the settled principles of law on the point,
held that such recourse is impermissible.
29. The same was the view of the Hon'ble Apex Court in
a subsequent case, in the case of Sachin v. State of
Maharashtra2. Therefore, in the absence of any appeal by the
State seeking enhancement of the sentence, this Court cannot
order for enhanced punishment though the accused has
committed brutal act.
Criminal Revision Petition No.100216/2019 dated 21.04.2025
(2025) 9 SCC 507
- 18 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486
HC-KAR
30. Taking note of the maximum punishment of a
minimum of 10 years for the offence under Section 6 of the
POCSO Act and having convicted the accused for the offence
punishable under Section 6 in aid of Section 18 of the Act,
especially in view of the findings in the RFSL report, this Court is
of the considered opinion that the sentence of 5 years ordered
for offence under Section 6 read with Section 18 of the POCSO
Act is just and proper and does not require any interference,
having regard to the fact that no mitigating circumstances are
placed on record, nor any defence evidence is placed on record.
Thus, point No.(iii) is answered in the negative.
31. In view of the finding of this Court on point No.(i) to
(iii) as above, regarding point No.(iv) the, following order:
ORDER
(i) The appeal is meritless and is hereby
dismissed.
(ii) The appellant, who is having benefit of
suspension of sentence, shall surrender
before the trial Court on or before
- 19 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486
HC-KAR
28.02.2026 to serve the remaining part of
the sentence.
(iii) The office is directed to return the trial
Court records with a copy of this Judgment.
Sd/-
(V.SRISHANANDA)
JUDGE
CLK,RHR/-, CT:CMU
LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 33
