High Court of Karnataka Acquits Accused in POCSO Case Due to Inconsistent Evidence and Lack of Corroboration. Conviction under Sections 452, 376AB, 506 IPC and Section 4 of POCSO Act set aside as prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: DHARWAD In Favour of Accused

Admin

2026-05-18 16:15:23

Font size:

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, Anand S/o Durgappa Gollar, was convicted by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-I, Belagavi in Special Case No.505/2023 for offences under Sections 452, 376AB, 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. The conviction was based on a complaint lodged on 03.08.2023 by a lady alleging that the accused committed sexual assault on a minor. The trial court sentenced the accused on 20.02.2025. The accused appealed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) read with Section 415(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). The High Court of Karnataka at Dharwad, comprising Justice R. Devdas and Justice B. Muralidhara Pai, heard the appeal and reserved judgment on 28.10.2025. The court examined the evidence and found material inconsistencies in the victim's testimony, including contradictions regarding the time and place of the incident. The prosecution failed to provide independent corroboration, and the medical evidence did not support the allegations. The court held that the presumption of innocence was not rebutted, and the benefit of doubt must be given to the accused. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the accused was acquitted.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Rape and Sexual Assault - Sections 452, 376AB, 506 IPC and Section 4 of POCSO Act - Conviction set aside - The accused was convicted for house trespass, rape of a minor, and criminal intimidation. The High Court found material inconsistencies in the victim's testimony and lack of independent corroboration, leading to the conclusion that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Held that the benefit of doubt must be given to the accused (Paras 1-10).

Issue of Consideration

Whether the conviction of the accused under Sections 452, 376AB, 506 IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act is sustainable in law given the inconsistencies and lack of corroboration in the prosecution evidence.

Final Decision

Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Accused acquitted.

Law Points

Presumption of innocence
Burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt
Corroboration of victim testimony
Inconsistencies in evidence
Benefit of doubt

Case Details

2025 LawText (KAR) (11) 47

CRL.A No. 100313 of 2025 (C)

2025-11-17

Justice R. Devdas, Justice B. Muralidhara Pai

Sri. Mahantesh S. Hiremath (for appellant), Sri M. B. Gundawade (Addl. S.P.P. for R1), Sri V. P. Vadavi (Adv. for R2)

Anand S/o Durgappa Gollar

The State of Karnataka and Deepa W/o Chandru Gurannavar

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against conviction for offences under IPC and POCSO Act

Remedy Sought

Setting aside of conviction and sentence

Filing Reason

Appeal against judgment of conviction dated 19.02.2025 and order of sentence dated 20.02.2025 passed by the trial court

Previous Decisions

Trial court convicted the accused under Sections 452, 376AB, 506 IPC and Section 4 of POCSO Act

Issues

Whether the conviction is sustainable given inconsistencies in victim testimony and lack of corroboration

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the prosecution evidence was inconsistent and lacked corroboration, and that the benefit of doubt should be given.

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt; inconsistencies in the victim's testimony and lack of independent corroboration entitle the accused to the benefit of doubt.

Judgment Excerpts

The accused in Special Case No.505/2023 on the file of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-I, Belagavi has maintained this appeal under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. read with Section 415(2) of the B.N.S.S.. Brief facts leading to this appeal are as under: On 03.08.2023 at 4.00 p.m., a complaint came to be lodged by a lady with APMC Yard Police of Belagavi city alleging that the accused herein has committed sexual assault on a minor.

Procedural History

The trial court convicted the accused on 19.02.2025 and sentenced him on 20.02.2025. The accused appealed to the High Court on 28.10.2025. The High Court reserved judgment and pronounced on 17.11.2025, allowing the appeal and acquitting the accused.