Karnataka HC Upholds POCSO Acquittal, Citing Girl’s Account To Doctor Of Willing Bengaluru Trip And Consensual Sex

The prosecution alleged that on 14 February 2014, Accused No. 1 took the complainant’s daughter from near her school to Bengaluru, where he sexually assaulted her at a lodge; Accused Nos. 2 and 3 were alleged to have aided him

The trial court acquitted the accused of the charged offences under the IPC and the POCSO Act.

The State appealed under Section 378 CrPC.

The appeal had earlier been dismissed as against Accused Nos. 2 and 3

The High Court considered the victim’s testimony, medical evidence, lodge records and other evidence, and the trial court’s reasons for acquittal

The appeal was brought under Sections 378(1) and (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against acquittal for offences charged under Sections 363, 366/366A, 376 and 109 read with Section 34 IPC, and Sections 3(a) and 4 of the POCSO Act

The State relied on the presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act, but the judgment does not separately analyse its application

Applying Jafarudheen v. State of Kerala, the Court stated that an appellate court should not reverse an acquittal where the trial court’s view is a possible one on the evidence; acquittal reinforces the presumption of innocence

The Court also referred to Tilku alias Tilak Singh v. State of Uttarakhand and State of Uttar Pradesh v. Anurudh in discussing adolescent relationships and alleged misuse of the POCSO Act

The Court considered the victim’s account alongside her failure to raise an alarm during the journey or at the lodge, her statement to the doctor that the sexual intercourse was consensual, the absence of external injuries and the FSL finding of no signs of recent intercourse

It also noted gaps in the lodge evidence, including the absence of CCTV footage from the floor where the rooms were situated, and concluded that the prosecution had not proved the alleged rape and kidnapping beyond reasonable doubt

The Court regarded the evidence concerning the victim’s relationship with Accused No. 1 and her proposed marriage to PW.5 as supporting its view that the case involved opposition to a relationship and misuse of the POCSO Act

The judgment records the victim’s date of birth as 1 June 1998 and the incident date as 14 February 2014, but later describes her as aged between 16 and 18; the recorded dates place her below 16 and, in any event, below 18

The Court nevertheless relied on its assessment of the relationship and the acquittal standard in declining to interfere.

The acquittal dated 14 August 2017 was confirmed