STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. HANUMANTHA S/O PUTTAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The judgment and order of acquittal dated 10.1.2013 passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangaluru in S.C. No.12/2011 is called in question by the State in this appeal. By the impugned judgment and order, the trial Court has acquitted the accused of the offences punishable under sections 366 A and 376 of IPC.

(2.) Brief facts of the prosecution case are that the police recorded the statement of the complainant Bheemappa (P.W.1) on 8.9.2010 at 10.30 p.m. wherein he stated that he is doing the coolie work. He is residing near Sudarshan Compound, behind Kadri Jogi Mutt, along with his family members i.e, his wife, three sons and a daughter by name Neelamma, aged 13 years, who is the victim in this case. On the date of the incident, his three sons left to the school and Neelamma was in the house. The accused who is originally the resident of Hanagal, Haveri District is residing in a rented house nearby the house of the complainant and he is also doing the coolie work. The accused used to talk to Neelamma. However, the complainant advised Neelamma not talk to the accused.

(3.) In order to prove its case, the prosecution in all examined 19 witnesses and got marked 15 exhibits and 3 material objects. On behalf of the defence, no witness is examined and no document is marked. The trial Court, on evaluation of the material on record, as aforementioned acquitted the accused for the said offences. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order of acquittal, the State has come up in appeal on the grounds as mentioned in the appeal memorandum.