STATE Vs. AMBARISH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dtd. 30/4/2016 rendered by the LIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru in Spl.C.C.No.277/2015. Respondent no.1 was prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sec. 363, 366 and 376 IPC and Sec. 5(J) (ii) and Sec. 6 of POCSO Act in relation to offence said to have taken place on 27/9/2013.

(2.) The prosecution case is that the accused was in love with PW.4 for about two years since before 27/9/2013 and on that day at about 4.00 p.m., when PW.4 was returning from college, the accused enticed her to elope with him so that they could get married. They went to Vijayawada and from there to a village called Margianapalli where they got married in a temple and returned to Bengaluru. For about eight months they resided together in a rented house and during that time they had intercourse. Some time later the accused tried to marry another girl and this resulted in FIR being registered, investigation held and charge sheet filed against the accused.

(3.) Four witnesses adduced evidence before the court. PW.1 is the doctor and professor of FSL at Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Medical College, Bengaluru and his evidence is that when he examined PW.4, he noticed signs of her having had sexual intercourse. PW.2 was the Principal of Chaitanya Pre-University College where the girl was studying and her evidence shows that she issued the certificate confirming the date of birth of PW.4 as 24/6/1997. Ex.P.3 is the certificate issued by her. PW.3 is the mother of the girl. She turned hostile and simply stated that her daughter had been to relatives house without informing her and therefore she made a missing complaint as per Ex.P.4. PW.4 is the girl, who according to prosecution was subjected to intercourse. But she turned hostile completely and did not support the prosecution case and even the efforts by the Public Prosecutor to impeach her in the cross-examination failed and therefore nothing worth was elicited from her.