Karnataka HC Upholds POCSO Acquittal, Citing Teen’s Prior Relationships And Three-Day Delay In Reporting Her Disappearance

In brief

The question

1. Whether the State had established that the trial court’s acquittal was arbitrary, erroneous, or unsupported by its appreciation of the evidence.

The court held

The Court answered the first issue in the negative and dismissed the State’s appeal, thereby confirming the acquittal entered by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court-I, Vijayapura, in Special Case (POCSO) No. 79/2023.

It also directed

It also directed the High Court Legal Services Committee, Kalaburagi Bench, to pay the amicus curiae an honorarium of ₹10,000.

01Facts

The prosecution alleged that the complainant’s daughter went missing on 20 September 2023 and that the accused had kidnapped and sexually assaulted her.

¶ 2

The prosecution relied on school records showing her date of birth as 1 June 2006; she was therefore 17 years, 3 months and 19 days old on the alleged date of the incident.

¶ 2, 14

The accused was charged under Sections 363 and 376(2)(n) of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

¶ 2–6

The trial court acquitted him, finding that the prosecution had not proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.

¶ 2–6

The State appealed against the acquittal.

¶ 7

02Issues

i.1. Whether the State had established that the trial court’s acquittal was arbitrary, erroneous, or unsupported by its appreciation of the evidence.

¶ 12(i)

ii.2. What order should follow.

¶ 12(ii)

03Law Applied

The charges arose under Sections 363 and 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

¶ 2, 5

The State also relied on the presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act, arguing that the accused had not rebutted it; the judgment records that submission but does not separately analyse the presumption.

¶ 9

On an appeal against acquittal under Section 378 Cr.P.C., the appellate court considers whether the trial court’s view is a possible one on the evidence; an acquittal strengthens the presumption of innocence, and should be reversed only after scrutiny on accepted legal principles.

¶ 21

The Court applied this rule from Jafarudheen v. State of Kerala, (2022) 8 SCC 440.

¶ 21

Provisions in the judgment · 8 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 419

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 378 Section 207 Section 313

Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 363 Section 376

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Section 6 Section 29

04Reasoning

The High Court noted that the trial court had considered the victim’s testimony, the evidence concerning her prior relationships and engagement, the delay in lodging the missing-person complaint, and the panch witnesses’ failure to support the prosecution.

¶ 16–20

The trial court had treated these circumstances as undermining the reliability of the prosecution case and had concluded that guilt was not proved beyond reasonable doubt.

¶ 19–20

Applying the heightened restraint applicable to appeals against acquittal, the High Court found the trial court’s view to be a possible one and identified no basis to interfere.

¶ 21–22