Student Abduction-To-Force-Marriage Case: Karnataka HC Upholds Acquittal Of 3 Men After Driver And Friend Turn Hostile

The State appealed the Sessions Court’s acquittal of three accused of kidnapping the victim with the alleged intention of compelling her to marry accused No. 1, an offence charged under Section 366 read with Section 34 of the IPC.

The prosecution alleged that on 11 June 2013 the victim was taken in a tempo traveller with the assistance of accused Nos. 2 and 3.

At trial, 15 witnesses were examined.

The trial court noted that the alleged vehicle driver and the victim’s friend had turned hostile, the victim’s father and uncle were not eyewitnesses, and the complaint was lodged after a two-day delay; it acquitted the accused on the benefit of doubt.

The State challenged that acquittal.

Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure permits an appellate court to reappraise the evidence in an appeal against acquittal, but the acquittal reinforces the presumption of innocence.

Under Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka (2007) 4 SCC 415, Babu Sahebgouda Rudragoudar v. State of Karnataka (2024) 8 SCC 149, H.D. Sundara v. State of Karnataka (2023) 9 SCC 581, and Constable 907 Surendra Singh v. State of Uttarakhand (2025) 5 SCC 433, an acquittal should not be reversed where the trial court’s view is a plausible one; interference is warranted where the judgment is perverse, rests on a misreading or omission of material evidence, or the evidence permits no reasonable conclusion other than guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Applying these principles, the High Court reappraised the record and found no legal or factual error in the trial court’s assessment.

The trial court had considered the hostile evidence of the alleged driver and the victim’s friend, the absence of eyewitness testimony from the victim’s father and uncle, and the delay in lodging the complaint, and concluded that the prosecution had not proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

The High Court held that this was a plausible view and that no basis for appellate interference had been shown.

The Court dismissed the State’s appeal, leaving the acquittal undisturbed.