Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Eshwar, was convicted by the LIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, in Special C.C. No. 597/2014 for offences under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5(n) read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, he filed the present appeal. The case arose from Crime No. 724/2014 registered by HAL Police, Bengaluru. The prosecution alleged that the appellant committed sexual assault on a minor girl. The trial court convicted him based on the victim's testimony. On appeal, the High Court examined the evidence and found that the victim's testimony was inconsistent and lacked corroboration. The medical evidence did not support the allegations of penetration. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted. The court directed that the appellant be set at liberty forthwith if not required in any other case.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape and Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault - Section 376 IPC, Section 5(n) read with Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Inconsistent Testimony - The victim's testimony was inconsistent and lacked corroboration; the medical evidence did not support the allegations; the court held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, and the accused is entitled to acquittal (Paras 2-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 376 IPC and Section 5(n) read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted. Bail bonds cancelled. Appellant to be set at liberty forthwith if not required in any other case.
Law Points
- Benefit of doubt
- Inconsistent testimony
- Lack of corroboration
- Age of victim
- Penetration
- POCSO Act
- Section 376 IPC
Case Details
2022 LawText (KAR) (02) 35
Criminal Appeal No.1831/2016
Sri Rakshith Jois (Amicus Curiae) for appellant, Smt. Rashmi Jadhav (HCGP) for respondent
State by Karnataka through H.A.L. Police
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against conviction for rape and aggravated penetrative sexual assault.
Remedy Sought
Appellant sought setting aside of conviction and sentence.
Filing Reason
Appellant was convicted by trial court under Section 376 IPC and Section 5(n) read with Section 6 of POCSO Act.
Previous Decisions
Trial court convicted the appellant in Special C.C. No. 597/2014 on 21/22.09.2016.
Issues
Whether the conviction under Section 376 IPC and Section 5(n) read with Section 6 of POCSO Act is sustainable.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that the victim's testimony was inconsistent and lacked corroboration.
Respondent supported the trial court's judgment.
Ratio Decidendi
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Inconsistent testimony of the victim and lack of corroboration, especially when medical evidence does not support the allegations, entitles the accused to acquittal.
Judgment Excerpts
Aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentence passed against him for the offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC and Section 5(n) read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, the accused in Special C.C.No.597/2014 ... has preferred the above appeal.
The appellant was prosecuted in Special C.C.No.597/2014 before the trial Court for the aforesaid offences on the basis of the charge sheet filed by HAL Police, Bengaluru City in Crime No.724/2014 of their police station.
Procedural History
The appellant was prosecuted in Special C.C. No. 597/2014 before the LIV Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, based on a charge sheet filed by HAL Police in Crime No. 724/2014. The trial court convicted him on 21/22.09.2016. He appealed to the High Court under Section 374(2) CrPC.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 376
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012: 5(n), 6
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 374(2)
