SRI SHAFI AHAMED KHAN vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Court
Karnataka High Court

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

TH
DATED THIS THE 6 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026


PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.PRAMOD

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2247 OF 2018 (C)

C/W

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1009 OF 2018 (C)


IN CRL.A NO.2247/2018

BETWEEN:


THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY POLICE INSPECTOR
MADIKERI TOWN CIRCLE POLICE STATION
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU
…APPELLANT




Digitally signed
by
SHARADAVANI
B
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA

(BY SRI VIJAYKUMAR MAJAGE, S.P.P.-II A/W
SMT. SOWMYA R., H.C.G.P.)

AND:



SHAFI AHAMED KHAN
S/O. IBRAHIM
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
BUSINESSMAN
PROPRIETOR OF COORG
FOOD COURT HOTEL, NEW EXTENSION
MADIKERI
RESIDING IN CHAMUNDESHWARI NAGAR

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


MADIKERI
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI K. SATISH KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI NASIR ALI, ADVOCATE)

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.377 CR.P.C BY THE STATE P.P.
FOR THE STATE PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND
ORDER DATED 28.04.2018 AND ORDER OF SENTENCE DATED
30.04.2018 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL SESSIONS AND
SPECIAL JUDGE, KODAGU, MADIKERI IN SPL.C.(POCSO)
NO.51/2015 AND ENHANCE THE SENTENCE IMPOSED ON THE
ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION
376(2)(i)(1) OF IPC AND SECTION 4 OF THE POCSO ACT AND
IMPOSE ADEQUATE AND PROPER SENTENCE ON THE
RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTION 376(2)(i)(1) OF IPC AND SECTION 4 OF

POCSO ACT, 2012 READ WITH SECTION 511 OF IPC.
IN CRL.A NO.1009/2018
BETWEEN:
SRI SHAFI AHAMED KHAN
S/O. IBRAHIM
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
BUSINESSMAN
Ex-PROPRIETOR OF COORG FOOD COURT HOTEL
NEW EXTENSION, MADIKERI
RESIDING IN CHAMUNDESHWARI NAGAR
MADIKERI-571 201
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI K. SATISH KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI RANJAN KUMAR P., ADVOCATE)

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH C.P.I
MADIKERI TOWN CIRCLE
MADIKERI TOWN P.S.
REPRESENTED BY LEARNED
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU-560 001
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI VIJAYKUMAR MAJAGE, S.P.P.-II A/W
SMT. SOWMYA R., H.C.G.P.)

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.374(2) CR.P.C BY THE
ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF CONVICTION DATED 28.04.2018
AND SENTENCE DATED 30.04.2018 PASSED BY THE
PRINCIPAL SESSIONS AND SPECIAL JUDGE, KODAGU,
MADIKERI IN SPL.C.(POCSO)NO.51/2015 - CONVICTING THE
APPELLANT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTION 376(2)(i) OF IPC AND SECTION 4 OF PROTECTION
OF CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT READ WITH
SECTION 511 OF IPC.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING,
THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.PRAMOD

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ)

The accused has preferred Crl.A.No.1009/2018 under
Section 374(2) of Cr.PC, challenging the judgment and
order of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court
for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(i) r/w 511
of IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012 r/w 511 of
IPC.
2. The State has preferred Crl.A.No.2247/2018
under Section 377 of Cr.PC, seeking enhancement of
sentence imposed against the accused, by the trial Court.
3. The accused was charged for the offence
punishable under Section 376(2)(i) of IPC and under
Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012, alleging that in the
month of March, 2015 at about 8.30 a.m., he called the
minor victim girl to his Home Stay for work and by closing
the door of the room, committed rape on her against her
will and without her consent.

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


4. The trial Court held that the prosecution was
successful in proving the guilt of the accused for the
offences punishable under Section 376(2)(i) r/w 511 of
IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012 r/w 511 of IPC,
by placing acceptable, sufficient, satisfactory and clinching
material on record. To arrive at the said conclusion, the
trial Court relied on the evidence of PW.2, the victim, and
observed that what is stated in her deposition, such acts
of the accused can be considered atleast as an attempt to
rape and for the same, there is sufficient and satisfactory
legal oral and documentary evidence brought on record by
the prosecution.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the
appellant, the learned SPP-II for the State and perused
the evidence and material on record.
6. The incident is alleged to have taken place in the
month of March, 2015. As per Ex.P3, the complaint of the
victim girl, she had studied upto X Standard. Her mother

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


was no more and her father had remarried. Since her
father and her step mother had scolded her for coming
late from the school, she left the house and came to
Madikeri in the month of September, 2014 and stayed in
the house of her sister Maheshkumari @ Chaitra. She
started working in the provision shop of one Umesh. Due
to some differences with her sister, she left her house and
stayed for about one month in a Girls Balamandir in
Madikeri. Thereafter, she stayed in the house of one
Sudhananda. She started working in the Home Stay of
the accused and during such time, she was also working
and residing in the house of one K.W. Bopaiah and was
going to the Home Stay for work from the said house. In
the month of March, 2015, the accused called on her
mobile phone in the morning asking her to come to the
Home Stay for work stating that some guests have
arrived. When she went to the Home Stay, nobody was
present there. At that time, the accused locked the house
and committed forcible sexual intercourse on her, in-spite

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


of her resistance. Thereafter, the accused gave life threat
to her, not to disclose the incident to others. Further, a
person by name Shafi, a friend of the accused was also
coming to the Home Stay. About one week thereafter, at
about 4.30 p.m., the said Shafi also attempted to commit
rape by grabbing her, but she escaped.
7. Based on the complaint-Ex.P3, a case was
registered against the appellant/accused No.1 and
Samshu/accused No.2, for the offences punishable under
Section 376 and 354 of IPC and Section 4, 8 and 12 of
POCSO Act, 2012. Upon completion of the investigation,
charge sheet was filed, showing accused No.2 as
'absconding'.
8. Learned counsel for the appellant has vehemently
contended that the prosecution has failed to establish that
the victim girl was a minor at the time of incident. He
contended that, according to the prosecution, the victim
was studying in SSLC, but prosecution has failed to obtain

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


the SSLC marks card. The victim's birth certificate was
also not obtained and no 'ossification test' was conducted.
He contended that the documents relied upon by the
prosecution i.e. the Admission Register Extract from the
school and the Transfer Certificate are not authenticated
documents to prove the age of the victim and the person
who made entries in the Admission Register has not been
examined. Therefore, contended that the trial Court has
erred in holding that the victim was a minor and thereby
convicting the accused under the POCSO Act, 2012.
9. Learned counsel for the appellant further
contended that there is an inordinate delay in reporting
the alleged incident. The incident, according to the victim
had taken place in the Home Stay, which is situated in the
busy area whereas none of the witnesses have
corroborated about such incident having taken place. The
victim has not disclosed the incident to others till she was
admitted at Odanadi Seva Samsthe and even thereafter,
she has not disclosed the alleged incident. He contended

- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


that, according to the prosecution, it was a person by
name Muneer Machari who committed sexual intercourse
on the victim, due to which she took poison and later got
admitted at the said Odanadi Samsthe. He further
contended that the evidence of the victim is not supported
by any other evidence including the medical evidence and
therefore, the trial Court was not proper in recording an
order of conviction and sentence against the accused.
10. Per contra, the learned SPP-II contended that
the victim was working in the Home Stay of the accused is
very much established from the evidence of the
prosecution witnesses and it is also not disputed by the
defence. The accused after committing forcible sexual
intercourse on the victim, threatened her with dire
consequences and therefore, she did not reveal the
incident to others, till she was admitted at Odanadi
Samsthe, Mysuru. During counseling, she revealed the
entire incident and thereafter the complaint came to be
lodged against the accused. He contended that the

- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


evidence of the victim is reliable and trustworthy. Further
contended that the prosecution has examined PW14, Vice
Principal of the Government Junior College, where the
victim had studied and got marked the Admission Register
Extract and the Transfer Certificate concerning the victim,
which clearly shows that the date of birth of the victim is
'02.04.1999'. Therefore, it is proved that the victim was
aged about 16 years at the time of incident. He contended
that the trial Court based on the oral and documentary
evidence on record, came to the conclusion that the
accused has made an attempt to commit rape on the
victim. He contended that in view of the serious nature of
the offence committed, the sentence imposed by the trial
Court is inadequate and therefore, sought to dismiss the
appeal preferred by the accused and to enhance the
sentence imposed by the trial Court by allowing the appeal
preferred by the State.
11. To prove the age of the victim, the prosecution
has produced and marked Exhibit P8-Admission Register

- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


Extract and Exhibit P10-Original Transfer Certificate. The
said documents are marked through PW.14. The trial
Court, based on the said documents has opined that the
victim was a minor on the date of incident. Further, held
that as per law, conducting of medical test to determine
the age of the victim is absolutely unnecessary.
12. In Exhibit P3-complaint, the victim has stated
that she had studied upto X Standard in M. Sangha Shetty
Pre-University Government College. In her deposition, she
has stated that in the year 2014, she was studying in
SSLC at Government College at Kuderu, Chamarajanagar.
In her cross-examination, she has stated that she did not
write 10th examination and she discontinued in the middle
of X Standard.
13. PW14 is the Vice Principal of the Government
Junior College at Kuderu, Chamarajanagar. He has stated
that as per the requisition given by the Investigating
Officer, he issued the Admission Register Extract-Exhibit

- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


P8. Further stated that he issued the said Admission
Register Extract, as the same was entered in the
Admission Register of the College on the basis of Transfer
Certificate of 7th Standard. The original Transfer
Certificate is marked as Exhibit P10. The true copy of the
original T.C is marked as Exhibit P11.
14. It is relevant to extract paragraphs 13 and 14 of
the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in
P . Yuvaprakash V/s. State reported in 2023 SCC
Online SC 846:
" 13. Before discussing the merits of the contentions and
evidence in this case, it is necessary to extract Section 34
of the P OCSO Act which reads as follows:
“ 34. Procedure in case of commission of
offence by child and determination of age
by Special Court .—(1) Where any offence
under this Act is committed by a child, such
child shall be dealt with under the provisions of
the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Act, 2015 (2 of 2016).
(2) If any question arises in any proceeding
before the Special Court whether a person is a
child or not, such question shall be determined
by the Special Court after satisfying itself about

- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


the age of such person and it shall record in
writing its reasons for such determination.
(3) No order made by the Special Court shall
be deemed to be invalid merely by any
subsequent proof that the age of a person as
determined by it under sub-section (2) was not
the correct age of that person.”
14. In view of Section 34(1) of the P OCSO Act, Section
94 of the JJ Act, 2015 becomes relevant, and
applicable. That provision is extracted below:
“ 94. Presumption and determination of
age .—(1) Where, it is obvious to the
Committee or the Board, based on the
appearance of the person brought before it
under any of the provisions of this Act (other
than for the purpose of giving evidence) that
the said person is a child, the Committee or the
Board shall record such observation stating the
age of the child as nearly as may be and
proceed with the inquiry under Section 14 or
Section 36, as the case may be, without
waiting for further confirmation of the age.
(2) In case, the Committee or the Board has
reasonable grounds for doubt regarding
whether the person brought before it is a child
or not, the Committee or the Board, as the
case may be, shall undertake the process of
age determination, by seeking evidence by
obtaining—
(i) the date of birth certificate from the school,
or the matriculation or equivalent certificate
from the examination Board concerned, if
available; and in the absence thereof;
(ii) the birth certificate given by a corporation
or a municipal authority or a panchayat;

- 14 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


(iii) and only in the absence of (i) and (ii)
above, age shall be determined by an
ossification test or any other latest medical age
determination test conducted on the orders of
the Committee or the Board:
Provided such age determination test
conducted on the order of the Committee or
the Board shall be completed within fifteen
days from the date of such order.
(3) The age recorded by the Committee or the
Board to be the age of person so brought
before it shall, for the purpose of this Act, be
deemed to be the true age of that person.”

15. Admittedly, in the case on hand, the
matriculation or equivalent certificate issued by the
Examination Board or the Birth Certificate given by the
Corporation or Municipal Authority or Panchayat are not
produced. The victim has stated that she has not
completed her SSLC. The age of the victim was also not
determined by an ossification test or any other similar
test. The prosecution is relying on the School Admission
Extract and the Transfer Certificate pertaining to the
victim. The said school admission register and the Transfer
Certificate is of 7th Standard. The documents concerning

- 15 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


the victim when she joined first standard, are not collected
and produced. The victim in her cross-examination,
though denied that at the time of incident she was aged
more than 18 years, but she admitted that she do not
know as to whether the date of birth was mentioned
approximately or not, when she was admitted to first
standard.
16. PW.14 in his cross-examination has stated that
the parents of the victim had admitted her in their school
and she had studied upto 7th standard in Government
Higher Primary School at Kamaravadi, Chamarajanagar.
The prosecution has not made any attempt to get the
documents from the school, where the victim studied from
I standard upto VII standard. Though PW14 has issued
Exhibits P8, 10 and 11, but he has stated that he cannot
say on what basis Ex.P10-the Transfer Certificate was
written and also the date of birth. The person who made
entries in the Admission Register and the Transfer
Certificate has not been examined. Hence, it cannot be

- 16 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


held that the prosecution has proved beyond all
reasonable doubt that the victim was a minor as on the
date of incident.
17. It is the specific case of the prosecution that the
victim was working in the Home Stay of the accused and
in the month of March, 2015, the accused committed rape
on her and gave life threat to her, not to disclose the
incident to others. It is pertinent to see that there is no
charge framed against the accused for the offence
punishable under Section 506 of IPC. Though the incident
is alleged to have committed in the month of March, 2015,
the victim has not revealed the incident to others, until
she was admitted at Odanadi Samsthe.
18. PW.5, serving as a counselor in the said samsthe,
has stated that the victim was admitted in their samsthe,
as she had attempted to commit suicide by taking rat
poison. At the time of her admission, she made counseling
with the victim on 27.05.2015 and at that time, she told

- 17 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


that she was working in the home stay of accused No.1.
She made regular counseling with her. On 29.05.2015
during counseling, the victim told that one Muneer Machari
had exploited her sexually. Then told that she has to say
something more. On 09.06.2015, when she was
counseling, the victim disclosed that when she was
working in the house of Bopaiah, accused No.1 called her
to his Home Stay to prepare breakfast and committed rape
on her and further disclosed the accused by name Samshu
also attempted to commit rape on her. On 12.06.2015,
PW.5 informed the said facts to the Child Welfare
Committee.
19. From the above evidence of PW5, it is seen that
the victim was got admitted at Odanadi Seva Samsthe, as
she had attempted to commit suicide by taking rat poison.
During counseling, the victim had revealed to PW.5 that
one Muneer Machari had exploited her sexually. This
disclosure was made on 29.05.2015. At that time, the
victim has not alleged anything against the accused.

- 18 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


Thereafter, on 09.06.2015, the victim is alleged to have
disclosed the name of the accused stating that he had
committed rape on her. The complaint is lodged on
01.07.2015. In the cross-examination, PW5 has stated
that since he came to know that the Child Welfare
Committee did not take the matter before the police, they
got the complaint lodged through CW.1.
20. PW.1 was serving as a social worker in the
Odanadi Seva Samsthe, Mysuru. She has deposed that on
22.05.2015, the elder sister of the victim and her
husband, Raghavendra brought the victim to their
samsthe. Smt.Vinutha (PW5) counseled the victim, who
told her problems and narrated the incident occurred in
Madikeri, saying that the owner of the Home Stay i.e. the
accused committed rape on her and another person by
name Samshu attempted to commit rape on her. Further,
on 01.07.2015, she went to Madikeri Town Police Station
along with the victim and lodged a complaint against
accused Nos.1 and 2.

- 19 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


21. Before appreciating the evidence of the victim
(PW.2), it may be useful to refer to the decision of Hon'ble
Apex Court in Krishan Kumar Mallika Vs. State of
Hariyana , reported in (2011) 7 SCC 130. It is held
therein that although the victim's solitary evidence in
matters related to sexual offences is generally deemed
sufficient to hold an accused guilty, the conviction cannot
be sustained if the prosecutrix testimony is found
unreliable and insufficient due to identified flaws and
lacuna. The solitary evidence of the prosecutrix is
sufficient, provided the same inspires confidence and
appears to be absolutely trustworthy, unblemished and
should be of sterling quality.
22. The victim girl has deposed in her evidence that
during September, 2014, she left her house, since her
father and step mother assaulted her. She then came to
Madikeri along with her grand mother and stayed in the
house of her elder sister-Mahesh kumari (CW.7). She was
working in one Lakshmi Provision stores, belonging to

- 20 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


CW.12, Umesh (PW.7). At that time, there was
misunderstanding and galata with her elder sister and she
was driven out of the house by her sister. Then she joined
the Girls Observation Home, (Balamandira) at Madikeri
and stayed there for one month from 12.11.2014 to
16.12.2014. Then she left the said Balamandira and
stayed in the house of one Sudhananda, doing household
work. At that time, she was going to the home stay of the
accused. She has further stated that she left the house of
Sudhananda and started working in the house of
K.W.Bopaiah (PW.11). She was doing household work and
from there she was going to the home stay of the accused,
wherein, she used to do works like sweeping, washing the
utensils, cleaning and arranging of beds etc.
23. PW.2 has further deposed that in the second
week of March, 2015, accused called her over phone and
asked her to come to the home stay to prepare food for
the guests. She went to the home stay at about 08:30
a.m., but there were no guests. The accused locked the

- 21 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


front door and back door of the home stay, hence, there
was no chance for her to escape. The accused took her by
force and made her to lie on the bed, removed her clothes
and also removed his clothes and committed sexual
intercourse, without her consent. After committing rape,
the accused threatened with dire consequences not to
disclose the same to anybody. PW.2 has deposed that due
to the life threat given by the accused and due to fear for
her life, she did not disclose the incident to anybody till
she joined the Odanadi Samsthe, Mysuru.
24. As already stated, there is no charge framed
against the accused for giving life threat to the
victim-PW.2. It is relevant to refer to Ex.P4, the
statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of
Cr.P.C.,. wherein she has stated that after the incident,
she remained in the guest house and came to her house at
about 01:00 p.m. Thereafter, for two days she did not go
to the home stay. After about a week, when she was
cleaning the home stay, one Shafi, a friend of the accused

- 22 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


tried to grab her from behind and she escaped from his
th
clutches. She has further stated that on 12 April, while
she was retuning from her village, one Muneer Machari
telephoned to her and enquired about her whereabouts.
Then he told her that he will bring a vehicle and asked her
to stay in Piriyapatna. At about 01:00 p.m., the said
Muneer Machari, took her to a movie and then took her to
Hassan on his motorcycle. He took her to a lodge in
Javagal and committed forcible sexual intercourse on her
and on the next day, he left her at Konanuru and went
away. She has further stated that, due to the said
th
incident, on 20 May, she took poison and Boppaiah
(PW.11) admitted her to the hospital. The accused herein
sent her luggage to the house of her sister. Her sister and
brother-in-law, called her father and got her admitted at
Odanadi Samsthe, Mysuru and after twenty days, she
revealed the said incident.
25. The statement at Ex.P4 given before the
Magistrate is not disputed by PW.2. The said statement

- 23 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


th
reveals that on 12 of April, while she was returning from
her village, the victim met one Muneer machari and along
with him, she went to a lodge wherein, the said Muneer
machari committed rape on her. It further reveals that on
th
May, 20 the victim consumed poison and she was
admitted to hospital and thereafter, accused herein sent
her luggage to the house of her sister and then she was


admitted at Odanadi Samsthe, Mysuru.
26. The evidence of PW.11-K.W Bopaiah also reveals
that in the month of May,2015, the victim had consumed
rat poison. He has stated that the victim was admitted to
one Ashwini Hospital for treatment. He further deposed
that he informed the matter to the accused also and the
accused visited the hospital along with CWs.6 and 7 i.e.,
the sister and brother-in-law of the victim. Thereafter, he
told the relatives of the victim to take her.
27. The above material on record shows that even
after the alleged incident which took place in the month of

- 24 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


March 2015, the victim was working in the home stay and
she did not disclose the matter to anyone. She consumed
some poison on 20.05.2015 and was admitted to the
hospital by PW.11. Thereafter, the accused was informed
by PW.11, who visited the hospital along with victim's
sister and brother-in-law. Only thereafter, the victim was
admitted at Odanadi Seva Samsthe.
28. From Ex.P4, it is evident that on 12th April, a
person by name Muneer Machary took the victim to a
lodge and committed rape. She attempted to commit
suicide on 20th of May. Even after she was admitted at
Odanadi Seva Samsthe, she has not disclosed about the
accused committing rape on her in the month of March,
2015. The evidence of PW.5 goes to show that, on
29.05.2015 during counseling, the victim girl on told her
that one Muneer Machary had exploited her sexually. She
did not disclose about the accused committing rape on her
even on 29.05.2015. It is only on 09.06.2015 she

- 25 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


allegedly revealed about the rape committed by the
accused. The complaint is however lodged on 01.07.2015.
29. In the history furnished by the victim girl before
the doctor, during her medical examination, she has
narrated about going along with one Muneer to Halebeedu
and Javagal and staying together in a hotel on
12.04.2015. She has stated that the said Muneer
frequently committed sexual act with her. She has further
stated that she returned to Madikeri on 13.04.2015 and
worked there till 20.05.2015. The accused came to know
about her friendship with Muneer and therefore scolded
her and she felt bad and consumed some poison. She was
treated and went to her parents' and sister's house and on
22.05.2015 she was admitted to Odanadi Seva Samsthe.
30. The above history furnished by the victim also
reveals that even after the rape allegedly committed by
the accused, she continued to work in the home stay. The
accused came to know about her friendship with Muneer

- 26 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


and therefore scolded her. Even in her cross-examination,
PW.2 has admitted that when she was admitted in the
hospital, the accused and his wife came to the hospital to
see her and he and his family took her to the home stay
and she stayed there along with her elder sister and her
brother-in-law.
31. PW.2 has deposed that while she was resisting
the act of the accused, she sustained bleeding from her
private parts and even her undergarments, bed and
bedspread were stained with blood. The prosecution has
not seized the undergarments or the bedspread. The
medical examination report-Ex.P1 does not corroborate
the evidence of the victim. Even otherwise, as admitted by
the victim herself, she was subjected to sexual intercourse
by the person called Muneer on 12.04.2015, i.e., about a
month after the alleged incident. It is contended by the
learned counsel for the appellant that a separate case was
registered against Muneer Machary and after trial, he was
acquitted.

- 27 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


32. The Investigation Officer-PW.19 has admitted
that the victim had also lodged a complaint against one
Muneer at Javagal Police Station and as per the FIR, the
alleged incident happened on 12.04.2015.
33. The trial Court has come to the conclusion that
there is no material/evidence on record to convict the
accused for the offences punishable under Section
376(2)(i) of IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012.
However, holding that the medical evidence is not required
to convict the accused for attempt to rape, convicted him
for the offences punishable under Section 376 (2)(i) r/w
511 of IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012 r/w 511
of IPC. In our considered view, the reasons assigned by
the trial Court are not in accordance with law.
34. On a careful appreciation of evidence of PW.2-
the victim girl, we find that her evidence is not reliable and
trustworthy. Her evidence cannot be relied upon to hold
the appellant/accused guilty of the charges or for the

- 28 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018


offences for which he is convicted by the trial court.
Judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial
Court is not sustainable.
35. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER

i. Criminal Appeal No.1009/2018 is allowed .


ii. Criminal Appeal No.2247/2018 is dismissed .


iii. The judgment dated 28.04.2018 and the order
on sentence dated 30.04.2018, passed by the
Court of Principal Sessions and Special Judge at
Madike in Special Case (POCSO) No.51/2018,
convicting and sentencing the accused/appellant
for the offences punishable under Section
376(2)(i) r/w 511 of IPC and Section 4 of the
POCSO Act, 2012 r/w 511 of IPC is set aside .


iv. The accused/appellant is acquitted of the above
offences.

- 29 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55763-DB
CRL.A No. 2247 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 1009 of 2018


CNR: KAHC010303872018




v. The bail bond executed by the accused/appellant
stands cancelled.

vi. The order passed by the trial Court to disburse
the amount of compensation to the victim as per
the Karnataka Victim Compensation Scheme,
2018 is not disturbed.


Sd/-
(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ)
JUDGE


Sd/-
(B.PRAMOD)
JUDGE




MKM,LDC,BSV
CT:VC
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7