LAWS(KAR)-2024-10-9

MANJUNATHA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Decided On October 22, 2024
MANJUNATHA Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KARNATAKA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed against the judgment of conviction and order on sentence dtd. 1/8/2018 passed in Spl.C. No. 45/2017 by I Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Ramanagara, convicting the appellant - accused for offence under Sec. 366-A, 376(2)(i) of IPC and Sec. 4 of the POCSO Act and sentencing to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years for offence punishable under Sec. 376(2)(i) of IPC and rigorous imprisonment for 3 years for offence under Sec. 366-A of IPC.

(2.) Factual matrix of the prosecution case is that seven months prior to the incident the appellant - accused and victim girl - P.W.1 were known to each other. On 17/1/2017 the appellant - accused asked the victim girl to come to the KSRTC bus stand and the victim girl came at 04.00 pm and asked the appellant - accused why he called her, for that the appellant - accused asked her to come to his village. When she refused, he threatened that he would die if she does not come. Therefore, the victim girl boarded the KSRTC bus along with the appellant - accused, he took her to Hosur Colony near Dindawara Village to his house and stayed there till 26/1/2017. On 25/1/2017, at night hours, the appellant - accused committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon the victim girl even though she refused. Charge sheet came to be filed against the appellant - accused for offence under Sec. 366-A, 367(2)(i) of IPC and Sec. 4 of POCSO Act. The Special Court has framed charge for the said offence. The prosecution has examined 10 witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.10 and got marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.12 and M.O.1 to M.O. 9. Statement of appellant - accused came to be recorded under Sec. 313 of Cr.P.C. After hearing arguments on both sides the trial Court formulated points for consideration and convicted the appellant - accused for the aforesaid offences. Said judgment of conviction and order on sentence has been challenged in this appeal.

(3.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant - accused and learned HCGP for respondent - State.