STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. NAGENDRA B.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State has preferred this appeal challenging the acquittal judgment dtd. 29/4/2016 in Spl. C.C.544/2014 on the file of Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH54), Bengaluru.

(2.) The prosecution case is that PW6, the daughter of PW8, was studying in BMS Pre-University College for Women, Basavanagudi, Bengaluru. She was a resident of a PG being run by PW2. Finding that PW6 was not at all returning to PG even after 10 O' clock every day, he informed the same to PW8 who in turn went to the college and made enquiries. He came to know that his daughter was not attending the college since 15/7/2014. Again he went to the PG and came to know that his daughter had left that place with her bag and baggage. Therefore he went to the police station and made a complaint as per Ex.P8 about missing of his daughter. On 22/9/2014 the police informed him that his daughter had been traced. He came to police station and on enquiry he came to know that his daughter was loving the respondent, that both of them had been to Gujarat and from there they came to Hyderabad where they lived for some days and during that time the respondent had intercourse with her. Thus the accused came to be prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sec. 366, 376 of IPC and Sec. 5(l) read with Sec. 6 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. ('POCSO Act' for short).

(3.) In order to establish its case, the prosecution examined ten witnesses as PW1 to PW10 and produced nine documents as per Exs.P1 to P9. The prime witness, i.e., PW6 turned hostile. Therefore the trial court recorded a finding that the prosecution was not able to prove its case and hence acquitted the accused.