Case Note & Summary
The State of Karnataka filed an appeal under Section 378(1) & (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment of acquittal dated 03.02.2017 passed by the III Additional District and Sessions Judge & Special Judge (POCSO Act), Belagavi in S.C.No.199/2015. The respondent-accused, Asif Rasoolsab Sanadi, was acquitted of offences punishable under Sections 376(1), 342, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 4, 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The case arose from a complaint that the accused allegedly committed rape on a minor girl aged about 14 years on 20.04.2015 at his residence. The trial court, after examining the evidence, found the prosecution case doubtful due to inconsistencies in the victim's testimony, delay in lodging the FIR, and lack of corroborative medical evidence. The High Court, in its judgment delivered on 23.03.2022, dismissed the appeal, holding that the trial court's findings were not perverse and that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court emphasized that in an appeal against acquittal, the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused is strengthened, and interference is warranted only if the judgment is perverse. The court noted that the victim's evidence was not reliable, and there was no corroboration from independent witnesses or medical evidence. Consequently, the acquittal was confirmed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Acquittal Appeal - Section 378 Cr.P.C. - Scope of Interference - The High Court in an appeal against acquittal can interfere only if the judgment is perverse or based on no evidence. The presumption of innocence in favour of the accused is strengthened by acquittal. (Paras 1-3) B) POCSO Act - Sexual Offences - Sections 4, 8, 12 - Corroboration of Victim Testimony - The testimony of the victim, though a child, must be reliable and free from contradictions. In this case, the victim's evidence was inconsistent and not corroborated by medical evidence or other witnesses, leading to acquittal. (Paras 4-10) C) Indian Penal Code - Rape - Section 376(1) - Medical Evidence - Absence of injuries on the victim or accused, and the delay in lodging FIR, cast doubt on the prosecution case. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the offence beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 11-15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial court is perverse and liable to be set aside?
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The judgment of acquittal dated 03.02.2017 passed by the III Addl. District and Sessions Judge & Spl. Judge (POCSO Act), Belagavi in S.C.No.199/2015 is confirmed.
Law Points
- Acquittal appeal
- Section 378 Cr.P.C.
- presumption of innocence
- benefit of doubt
- corroboration of victim testimony
- POCSO Act
- child witness
- delay in lodging FIR
- medical evidence
