THE STATE OF KARNATAKA vs DOOLAPPA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11157-DB
CRL.A No. 200077 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030028122026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
TH
DATED THIS THE 9 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 200077 OF 2026
(378(Cr.PC)/419(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH VIJAYAPURA
RURAL POLICE STATION,
VIJAYAPURA DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY
ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. ANILKUMAR NAVADAGI, ADDL. SPP)
Digitally signed
by B NAGAVENI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
AND:
1. DOOLAPPA S/O BALU MASHAL,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
OCC: LABOURER,
R/O. ARAKERI MANAVAR DODDI,
TQ. VIJAYAPURA,
DIST. VIJAYAPURA.
2. SHRI. TUKARAM MANVAR,
R/O. ARAKERI DODDI,
TQ. VIJAYAPURA,
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11157-DB
CRL.A No. 200077 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030028122026
DIST. VIJAYAPURA,
KARNATAKA.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. DEEPAK V. BARAD, AMICUS CURIAE FOR R1;
R2 IS SERVED )
THIS CRL.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 419(1) AND (3) OF
BNSS/UNDER SECTION 378 (1) AND (3) OF THE CR.P.C., PRAYING
TO, A) GRANT LEAVE TO APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND
ORDER DATED 18.03.2024 PASSED BY THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE,
FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT-I AT VIJAYAPURA IN SPL. CASE
(POCSO) NO.79/2023.
B) SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 18.03.2024
PASSED BY THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, FAST TRACK SPECIAL
COURT-I AT VIJAYAPURA IN SPL. CASE (POCSO) NO.79/2023
THEREBY ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT-ACCUSED FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 363 AND 376(2)(N) OF
THE INDIAN PENAL CODE 1860 (IPC) AND SECTION 6 OF THE
PROTECTION OF CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT, 2012
(POCSO ACT, 2012).
C) CONVICT AND SENTENCE THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR
THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 363 AND 376(2)(N)
OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE 1860 (IPC) AND SECTION 6 OF THE
PROTECTION OF CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 2012
(POSCO ACT 2012).
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11157-DB
CRL.A No. 200077 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030028122026
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI)
1. This appeal is filed under Section 378(1) and (3) of
the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short,
‘Cr.P.C.,’)/Section 419(1) and (3) of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), challenging
the judgment of acquittal dated 18.03.2024, passed
in Special Case (POCSO) No.79 of 2023 by the
Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court-
I, Vijayapura (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Trial
Court’).
2. Brief facts giving rise to filing of this appeal are as
under:
It is the case of the prosecution that the complainant
has got five children, out of them, three are female
and two are male. Among them, the victim girl
studied up to 8th standard at Arakeri Government
School, and two years prior to the incident, she left
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11157-DB
CRL.A No. 200077 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030028122026
the school. It is alleged that on 20.09.2023 at about
9.00 a.m., the complainant sent the victim girl to the
land, where her brother was working, to give meals,
and thereafter, the complainant and his wife went to
Vijayapura for hospital and came back to their house
at 4.00 p.m. When they came home, the victim girl
was not in the house, and therefore, they went to
their land, and the victim was also not there in the
land. Lastly, they enquired with his son Dondiba, but
he replied that the victim did not come over there.
Thereafter, they all went in search of the victim girl,
but the efforts made by them were in vain.
Therefore, the complainant lodged a complaint before
the police and the same was registered in Crime
No.325/2023 of Vijayapura Rural Police Station. The
police, after registering the crime, arrested the
accused on 29.09.2023 near Arakeri Temple and
brought him to the police station. The police, after
investigation, filed charge sheet for the offences
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11157-DB
CRL.A No. 200077 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030028122026
punishable under Sections 363 and 376(2)(n) of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860, (for short, ‘IPC’) and
Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act, 2012 (for short ‘the POCSO Act, 2012’).
The Special Court took cognizance of the offence on
02.12.2023. Section 207 of the Cr.P.C., was
complied with and charge was framed on 14.12.2023
for the offences punishable under Sections 363 and
376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act,
2012 and the same was read over to the accused.
The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be
tried.
3. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, has
examined 20 witnesses as PW.1 to PW.20 and
marked 35 documents as Exs.P.1 to P.35, and
M.Os.1 to 4 were marked. On behalf of the accused,
the accused marked one photo as Ex.D.1.
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11157-DB
CRL.A No. 200077 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030028122026
4. After closure of the prosecution evidence,
incriminating evidence appearing in the evidence of
the prosecution witnesses has been read over to the
accused as contemplated under Section 313 of
Cr.P.C. The accused denied incriminating evidence
and he has not adduced any defence evidence and
not made any statement before the Court.
5. The Trial Court, after hearing the learned counsel for
the parties, framed the following points for
consideration.
“(1) Does prosecution prove beyond
reasonable doubt that accused kidnapped
victim girl, who is under eighteen years of
age, out of keeping of lawful guardianship
without the consent of the guardian and
thereby committed an offence punishable
under Section 363 of IPC?
(2) Does prosecution further prove beyond
reasonable doubt that accused committed
rape on victim girl repeatedly and thereby
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11157-DB
CRL.A No. 200077 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030028122026
committed an offence punishable under
376(2)(n) of IPC?
(3) Does prosecution also prove beyond
reasonable doubt that accused committed
aggravated penetrative sexual assault on
victim girl and thereby committed an offence
punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act,
2012?
(4) What Order?”
6. The Trial Court, after appreciating the entire material
on record, answered point Nos.1 to 3 in the negative
and point No.4 as per the final order and the accused
was acquitted of the offences punishable under
Sections 363 and 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 6 of
the POCSO Act, 2012, by judgment dated
18.03.2024.
7. The State, aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal
dated 18.03.2024 passed in Special Case (POCSO)
No.79 of 2023 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11157-DB
CRL.A No. 200077 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030028122026
Track Special Court-I, Vijayapura, has filed this
appeal.
8. Heard the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor.
9. The learned Additional State Public Prosecutor
submits that the judgment of acquittal passed by the
Trial Court is arbitrary and erroneous. He submits
that the prosecution has examined 20 witnesses to
prove that the accused has kidnapped the victim and
committed rape. He also submits that as on the date
of the alleged incident, the victim was a minor and
the victim was subjected to aggravated penetrative
sexual assault by the accused and offence alleged
against the accused is liable to be punished under
Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. He also submits
that there is a presumption under Section 29 of the
POCSO Act. The accused has not rebutted the said
presumption by leading rebuttal evidence. The said
aspect was not properly considered by the Court
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11157-DB
CRL.A No. 200077 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030028122026
below and committed an error in acquitting the
accused. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow
the appeal.
10. Sri Deepak V. Barad, learned Amicus Curiae for
appearing for respondent-accused supports the
impugned judgment and order of acquittal passed by
the Trial Court and prays to dismiss the appeal.
11. Perused the records and considered the submissions
of the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor
appearing for the appellant-State.
12. The point that would arise for our consideration are:
i. Whether the State proves that the
judgment of acquittal passed by the
Trial Court is arbitrary and erroneous
and without appreciation of
evidence?
ii. What order?
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11157-DB
CRL.A No. 200077 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030028122026
Reg. Point (i):
13. Initially, the complainant i.e., father of the victim
girl, lodged a missing complaint on 23.09.2023 at
about 1.15 p.m., alleging that the victim girl was
missing. Therefore, a case in Crime No.325/2023
was registered before Vijayapura Rural Police
Station, Vijayapura. The police, after registering the
crime, arrested the accused on 29.09.2023 near
Arakeri Temple and brought him to the police station.
The police, after investigation, filed a charge sheet
for the aforesaid offences. The Special Court took
cognizance, framed the charges and recorded the
evidence.
14. The prosecution, in order to prove the age of the
victim, has produced the School Transfer Certificate
and entry No.693 in the school register relating to
victim girl, as per Exs.P.16 and P17, wherein victim's
date of birth is shown as 01.06.2006 and according
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11157-DB
CRL.A No. 200077 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030028122026
to the same, as on the date of the alleged incident,
the age of the victim girl was 17 years, 3 months and
19 days.
15. The victim girl was examined as PW.1. She has
deposed that, during the last two years, she came in
contact with the accused. Whenever she used to go
to the field and move in the street, the accused used
to follow her and talk with her. He used to tell her
that he was loving her and that he would marry her.
Even though she told him that he had already
married, he followed her, induced her and committed
rape.
16. During the course of cross-examination, it is elicited
that the victim was in love with one Tukaram
Barkade. When PW.1 was confronted with the
photograph, she admitted the photograph which is
marked as Ex.D.1. She also admitted that the matter
was settled for Rs.5,00,000/- in the presence of
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11157-DB
CRL.A No. 200077 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030028122026
elders. It is elicited that the love affair between
Tukaram Barkade and the victim girl broke down and
the matter was settled after receiving Rs.5,00,000/-
from said Tukaram. It was suggested to PW.1 that
she eloped with one Pandre and the matter was got
settled by her father after taking Rs.3,00,000/-. But,
she dined the said suggestion.
17. The victim girl has deposed that she was engaged to
one Amoghi Mane, and but she denied the
suggestion that the said engagement was terminated
at the intervention of elders.
18. The facts clearly shows that the victim girl has
enough worldly knowledge and she is in the habit of
having love affairs and extracting money. She
extracted money from Tukaram Bakade. The age of
the victim as on the date of the alleged offence is 17
years, 03 months and 19 days, and she was in a
- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11157-DB
CRL.A No. 200077 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030028122026
position to understand what is right and wrong for
her.
19. The Trial Court, after considering the entire material
on record, has recorded its findings in paragraphs-52
to 55, which read as under:
“52) From the above evidence, it would
be clear that, earlier, victim girl loved Tukaram
Barakade and that her love with him got broken
and that the matter was amicably settled after
receiving 5 lakh by complainant from him.
Similarly, victim girl's engagement was
performed with one Amoghi Mane and same got
terminated in the intervention of elders. These
facts would clearly show that victim girl has
enough worldly knowledge and that she is able
to take her own decision to the effect that what
is right and what is wrong. That being the case,
though school records discloses that she was
under 18 years of age at the time of alleged
incident, all these attending circumstances
would clearly establish the fact that she has
attained the age of maturity to take her own
decision.
- 14 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11157-DB
CRL.A No. 200077 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030028122026
53) Victim girl's evidence as well as
statements allegedly given before police as well
as Judicial Magistrate would clearly show that
she is loving accused for the last two years. If it
is hypothetically assumed that victim girl left
the house and went with accused, it is only
because of her loving accused. In that
circumstance, no overt act can be attributable
to accused in leaving the house by victim girl.
Thus, delay in lodging complaint after three
days of alleged missing, certainly, would fatal to
the case of prosecution. That being the case,
the sole testimony of victim girl would not
inspire the confidence of the Court to rely upon.
54) PW.5 and PW.6 are shown as panchas
to the panchanamas allegedly prepared in the
places where sexual intercourse had taken
place. Said panchanamas have been marked as
Exs.P.10 and P.11. Both PW.5 and PW.6 have
not supported the prosecution case. Be that as
it may, drawing of panchanama can be
considered as an adding factor to the case of
prosecution if prosecution has proved its case
beyond reasonable doubt.
55) So far as evidence of PW.14 who took
photos at the time of drawing of panchanama;
PW.15 who took FIR to the Court; PW.16 who
- 15 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11157-DB
CRL.A No. 200077 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030028122026
traced victim girl and took photo at the time of
taking her statement; PW.18 who is said to
have recorded the statement of victim girl;
PW.20 who registered FIR; and PW.10 who
investigated the case and filed charge-sheet,
would be a relevant evidence only in case of
proving the case put-forth by prosecution.”
20. From the perusal of the impugned judgment passed
by the Trial Court, it discloses that the Trial Court
has considered the entire evidence on record and
held that the prosecution has failed to bring home
the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
21. The Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Jafarudheen and
1
others v. the State of Kerala , in paragraph-25
held as follows:
“25. While dealing with an appeal against
acquittal by invoking Section 378 of the
Cr.PC, the Appellate Court has to consider
whether the Trial Court's view can be
termed as a possible one, particularly when
evidence on record has been analyzed. The
1
2022 8 SCC 440.
- 16 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11157-DB
CRL.A No. 200077 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030028122026
reason is that an order of acquittal adds up
to the presumption of innocence in favour
of the accused. Thus, the Appellate Court
has to be relatively slow in reversing the
order of the Trial Court rendering acquittal.
Therefore, the presumption in favour of the
accused does not get weakened but only
strengthened. Such a double presumption
that enures in favour of the accused has to
be disturbed only by thorough scrutiny on
the accepted legal parameters.”
22. In view of the above, we do not find any grounds to
interfere with the impugned judgment of the Trial
Court. Accordingly, we answer point No.1 in the
‘negative’ , holding that the Criminal Appeal filed by
the State is liable to be dismissed.
Reg. Point No.(ii):
23. In view of the above discussion, we proceed to pass
the following:
ORDER
i. The appeal is dismissed .
- 17 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11157-DB
CRL.A No. 200077 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030028122026
ii. The impugned judgment of acquittal
dated 18.03.2024 passed by the
Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track
Special Court – I at Vijayapura, in
Special Case (POCSO) No.79/2023, is
hereby confirmed.
iii. The High Court Legal Services
Committee, Kalaburagi Bench, is
directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as
honorarium to the learned Amicus
Curiae, appointed to represent
respondent No.1.
Sd/-
(ASHOK S. KINAGI)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO)
JUDGE
NB
List No.: 2 Sl No.: 13
Ct:pk