T E RAGHU vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:42836
CRL.A No. 541 of 2016
CNR: KAHC010246012016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 10 DAY OF AUGUST, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 541 OF 2016 (C)
BETWEEN:
T E RAGHU
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
S/O C. VERAPPA @ EARAPPA
THULAVANUR
CHILAKALANERPU HOBLI
CHITAMANI TALUQ
CHIKABALLAPURA DISTRICT – 562 101
Digitally
signed by
SUSHMA
LAKSHMI B
S
Location:
High Court
of Karnataka
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI.S.SHANKARAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. PRABHUGOUDA B TUMBIGI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KENCHARLAHALLI POLICE STATION
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:42836
CRL.A No. 541 of 2016
CNR: KAHC010246012016
CHINTAMANI TALUQ
CHICKBALLAPURA DISTRICT – 562 101
…RESPONDENT
(BY SMT.RASHMI PATEL, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
374(2) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT
OF CONVICTION AND ORDER OF SENTENCE
DATED:17.03.2016, 16.03.2016 PASSED BY THE II
ADDL. DIST., AND S.J., AT CHIKKABALAPUR (SITTING
AT CHINTAMANI) IN S.C.NO.110/2008-CONVICTING
THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S
376,506 OF IPC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING,
THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS
UNDER:
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:42836
CRL.A No. 541 of 2016
CNR: KAHC010246012016
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This criminal appeal is filed by the appellant
being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order
on sentence dated 16.03.2016 and 17.03.2016,
respectively passed in SC.No.110/2008 on the file of
II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapur
(Sitting at Chintamani), for the offences punishable under
Section 376 and 506 of Indian Penal Code ( for short IPC ).
2. The ranks of the parties henceforth will be
considered as per their rankings before the Trial Court.
Factual matrix of the case:
3. The case of the prosecution is that the Assistant
Sub-Inspector of Police received an intimation to record
the statement at the Government Hospital, Chintamani. He
went to the hospital and recorded the statement of the
victim. The said statement indicates that on 07.11.2007,
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:42836
CRL.A No. 541 of 2016
CNR: KAHC010246012016
at about 4:00 p.m., when the victim was cleaning utensils
in front of her house, the accused called her and informed
her that he wanted to talk to her. The victim refused to
talk with him since nobody was there in the house. At that
time, the appellant dragged her to the land situated
behind her house and committed sexual intercourse with
her. After the incident, he left the place by threatening her
not to disclose the incident to anybody. However, after the
incident, she informed her mother, her relatives and one
Sri. Venkatesh - Advocate. All of them took the victim to
the hospital and informed the jurisdictional – Police in that
regard. Then, the Police have recorded the statement of
the victim.
4. Based on the said statement, the respondent -
Police registered a case, conducted investigation and
submitted the charge-sheet.
5. To prove the case, the prosecution examined 12
witnesses as PW-1 to PW-12, marked 14 documents as
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:42836
CRL.A No. 541 of 2016
CNR: KAHC010246012016
Ex-P.1 to P.14 and identified 09 material objects as MO-1
to MO-9. On the contrary, the defence examined 03
witnesses as DW-1 to DW-3 and marked 02 documents as
Ex-D.1 and Ex-D.2. The Trial Court appreciated both oral
and documentary evidence on record and convicted the
appellant for the offences stated supra .
6. Heard the learned counsel for the respective
parties.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted
that the judgment of conviction and order on sentence
passed by the Trial Court is contrary to the evidence on
record. Therefore, the judgment of conviction and order on
sentence is liable to be set aside.
8. It is further submitted that the evidence of
PW-1 contained several contradictions, omissions and
improvements. However, these contradictions were not
appreciated properly by the Trial Court.
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:42836
CRL.A No. 541 of 2016
CNR: KAHC010246012016
9. It is further submitted that the Doctor/PW-7
who conducted the medical examination of the victim,
submitted a report stating that no external injuries were
found on the body of the victim. She further stated in her
evidence that no seminal stains or spermatozoa were
found on the clothes of P.W.-1. She stated that the victim
had not been subjected to recent sexual intercourse. Such
being the case, the conviction rendered by the Trial Court
appears to be not only erroneous but also improper.
Having said thus, learned counsel for the appellant prays
to allow the appeal.
10. Per Contra , the learned High Court Government
Pleader for respondent – State vehemently submitted that
the Trial Court has duly appreciated both oral and
documentary evidence on record. The evidence of the
prosecutrix indicated that she has consistently supported
the case of the prosecution and the medical report
corroborated the evidence of the victim. Merely because
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:42836
CRL.A No. 541 of 2016
CNR: KAHC010246012016
seminal stains or spermatozoa was not detected, it does
not take away the case of the prosecution. Therefore, the
conviction has to be upheld in order to render justice to
the victim. Making such submissions learned High Court
Government Pleader prays to dismiss the appeal.
11. Having heard learned counsel for the respective
parties and on perusal of the findings of the Trial Court, it
appears that the Trial Court after considering the evidence
of all the witnesses, opined that the presence of injuries
on the private parts of the victim is not necessary and it is
not fatal to the case of the prosecution. Further, it
emphasized that victim was a minor and she was
threatened and subjected to rape. Though, the Trial court
rendered the conviction, re-appreciation of the witnesses
is necessary.
12. PW-1, is stated to be the victim of the case. On
07.11.2007 at about 4:00 p.m., she was cleaning utensils
in front of her house, the evidence further would indicate
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:42836
CRL.A No. 541 of 2016
CNR: KAHC010246012016
that, the appellant had forcibly took her to a toor dal
plantation and removed all her clothes and committed
sexual assault on her. After the incident, she was tired and
unable to even wake up from the spot. Her mother and
grandmother found her in the said land, but she was not in
a position to talk to them. Thereafter, she woke up, put on
her clothes and went home. Subsequently, she was taken
to Government Hospital, Chintamani, where her statement
was recorded. In her cross-examination, she stated that
her marriage had been performed with another man a
year ago. She admitted that her clothes were removed by
the accused and that she was lying in a toor dal
plantation. However, as per the doctor’s report, she did
not sustain any external injuries, which creates doubt
regarding the alleged incident. The victim further stated in
her evidence that the accused committed a penetrative
sexual assault lasting nearly half an hour. Such being the
fact, if the incident had really occurred, the victim must
have sustained external injuries. The absence of any
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:42836
CRL.A No. 541 of 2016
CNR: KAHC010246012016
injuries certainly creates doubt about the incident.
However, the Trial Court failed to consider this aspect and
opined that external injuries may not be of much
consequence in rendering a conviction, which appears to
be erroneous and improper.
13. PW-2, stated to be the mother of the victim,
deposed in her evidence that her daughter was studying in
th
9 standard in English medium school. On the date of the
alleged incident, she came home after finishing her work,
however, her daughter was not found in the house. Hence,
she and her mother started searching her. After
sometimes her daughter was found in the land of Erappa,
consisting of a toor dal plantation, at that time, she
noticed that, her daughter had no clothes on her body.
Therefore, she dressed up her daughter and took her
home. PW-2 learnt that her daughter had been subjected
to sexual assault by the appellant. After hearing about the
incident, she and her family members met Sri. Venkatesh,
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:42836
CRL.A No. 541 of 2016
CNR: KAHC010246012016
an Advocate, and on his instruction, they took the victim
to the Sidlaghatta Hospital for a medical examination.
PW-2 is also a witness to the spot mahazar, which is
marked as Ex-P4 and she supported it. PW-2 is considered
as hearsay witness.
14. PW-3, is the nephew of the victim. His evidence
would disclose that he has learnt about the incident of
penetrative sexual assault from the victim. Thereafter,
they went and met the Advocate. Subsequently, a
complaint has been registered against the accused under
the instruction of the Advocate. He is also a witness to Ex-
P5. He stated in his cross-examination that the victim was
not in a position to speak for three days. Even though
suggestions were made to establish ill-will between the
family members of the accused and him, he denied the
suggestions.
15. PW-4, is a relative and also an Advocate. He is
also a hearsay witness. He admitted in his
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:42836
CRL.A No. 541 of 2016
CNR: KAHC010246012016
cross-examination that he contested the Panchayat
elections and secured only six votes, whereas the father of
the appellant had won the election.
16. PW-5, is stated to be a witness to the spot
mahazar which is marked as Ex-P4. He was treated as
hostile and cross-examined, but, nothing was elicited to
support the case of the prosecution.
17. PW-6, is stated to be the witness to the seizure
mahazar which is marked as Ex-P5.
18. PW-7, conducted medical examination of the
victim and submitted her reports as per Ex-P6 and
Ex-P7. The said reports indicate a final opinion that there
was evidence of an act like that of sexual intercourse
having recently occurred. However, spermatozoa were not
detected in the vaginal secretions. She admitted the
suggestion that injuries must have seen caused on the
backside of the victim if the incident occurred in the toor
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:42836
CRL.A No. 541 of 2016
CNR: KAHC010246012016
dal plantation and on the rough surface. However, no such
injuries were found on the back of the victim.
19. PW-8, who was working as a doctor, stated in
his evidence that he examined the accused and submitted
a report as per Ex-P9.
20. PW-9, who was working as a Head Master
submitted a report regarding the age of the victim as per
Ex-P.10, stating that it was submitted to the Investigating
Officer based on the admission register extract.
21. PW-10, who worked as a Circle Inspector of
Police, conducted part of investigation and handed it over
to C.W.-19 – Tanveer Ahmed.
22. PW-11, who worked as a Police Inspector,
continued the investigation after taking over the case from
P.W.-10 and submitted the charge-sheet.
- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:42836
CRL.A No. 541 of 2016
CNR: KAHC010246012016
23. PW-12, who worked as an Assistant Sub-
Inspector of Police, recorded the statement of the victim
after visiting the Government Hospital, Chintamani.
24. DW-1, stated in his evidence that the accused
was residing in Bengaluru and used to visit his native place
on special occasions like marriages or festivals. His father
worked as a Panchayat member. He further stated that
Advocate – Venkatesh and the father of the accused
contested the Panchayath election in which PW-4 was
defeated.
25. DW-2, stated in his evidence that the land of
Erappa is not situated in the vicinity of his house.
26. DW-3, stated in his evidence that he and the
accused were going to the land of the father of the
accused around 5:00 p.m., on 07.11.2007 to deliver food
to him.
- 14 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:42836
CRL.A No. 541 of 2016
CNR: KAHC010246012016
27. On going through the evidence of all these
witnesses, PW-1 stated that on 07.11.2007 around
4:00 p.m., she was taken to the toor dal plantation and
she had been subjected to penetrative sexual assault for
nearly half an hour on the rough surface of the land.
However, no injuries were found on her back. The
presence of injuries on the back of the victim assumes
greater significance, because, if such an incident had really
occurred on a rough surface without clothes, she must
have sustained injuries on her body. The absence of any
injuries certainly creates doubt regarding the alleged
incident.
28. On considering the evidence of PW-4 and his
admissions, it is clear that the family members of the
victim approached him immediately after the incident and
narrated the incident. Thereafter, they went to the hospital
for a medical examination. PW-4 is not only an Advocate
but also a defeated candidate in the Panchayat election,
- 15 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:42836
CRL.A No. 541 of 2016
CNR: KAHC010246012016
and he has been defeated by the father of the accused.
PW-4 admitted in his evidence regarding election.
29. On going through the evidence of all these
witnesses including the relatives of the victim and
independent witnesses, it can be inferred that the
possibility of implicating the accused falsely cannot be
ruled out. The Trail Court ought to have extended the
benefit of doubt. Having not extended the said benefit
resulted in passing the impugned judgment which is liable
to be set aside.
30. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
allowed
i. This Criminal Appeal is .
ii. The judgment of conviction and order on
sentence dated 16.03.2016 and
17.03.2016, respectively passed in
SC.No.110/2008 on the file of II Additional
- 16 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:42836
CRL.A No. 541 of 2016
CNR: KAHC010246012016
District and Sessions Judge, Chickballapur
(Sitting at Chintamani), is hereby, set
aside.
iii. The appellant is acquitted for the offences
punishable under Section 376 and 506 of
I.P.C.
iv. Bail bonds executed, if any, stands
cancelled.
Sd/-
(S RACHAIAH)
JUDGE
NM/-