Victim Has Locus To Request Court To Summon Witnesses Under Section 311 CrPC In State Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Order 2 Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Ground to Reject a Plaint: Supreme Court Draws Crucial Distinction Between Bar to Sue and Bar by Law No Right to Lawyer Before Advisory Board in Preventive Detention — Unless Government Appears Through Legal Practitioner: Supreme Court Wife's Dowry Statement Cannot Be Used to Prosecute Her for 'Giving' Dowry: Supreme Court Upholds Section 7(3) Shield Husband's Loan Repayments Cannot Reduce Wife's Maintenance: Supreme Court Raises Amount to ₹25,000 From ₹15,000 Prisoners Don't Surrender Their Rights at the Prison Gate: Supreme Court Issues Binding SOP to End Delays in Legal Aid Appeals A Judgment Must Be a Self-Contained Document Even When Defendant Never Appears: Supreme Court on Ex Parte Decrees Court Cannot Dismiss Ex Parte Suit on Unpleaded, Unframed Issue: Supreme Court Sets Aside Specific Performance Decree Denied on Title Erroneous High Court Observations Cannot Be Used to Stake Property Claims: Supreme Court Steps In to Prevent Misuse of Judicial Observations No Criminal Proceedings Would Have Been Initiated Had Financial Settlement Succeeded: Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail In Rape Case Directors Cannot Escape Pollution Law Prosecution by Claiming Ignorance: Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash Summons Against Company Directors Order 7 Rule 11 CPC | Court Cannot Peek Into Defence While Rejecting Plaint: Delhi High Court Death 3½ Months After Accident Doesn't Break Causal Link If Doctors Testify Injuries Could Cause Death: Andhra Pradesh High Court LLB Intern Posed as Supreme Court Advocate, Used Fake Bar Council Card and Police Station Seals to Defraud Victims of Rs. 80 Lakhs: Gujarat High Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail Husband Who Travels to Wife's City on Leave, Cohabits With Her, Then Claims She 'Never Lived With Him' Cannot Prove Cruelty: Jharkhand High Court Liquor Licence Is a State Privilege, Not a Citizen's Right — No Vested Right of Renewal Survives a Change in Rules: Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Stay on E-Auction Policy Court Holiday Cannot Save Prosecution From Default Bail: MP High Court No Search At Your Premises, No Incriminating Document, No Case: Rajasthan HC Quashes Rs. 18 Crore Tax Assessment Under Section 153C Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court

High Court of Karnataka Reverses Acquittal in POCSO Case, Criticizes Erroneous and Insensible Lower Court Judgment

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment on December 18, 2023, the High Court of Karnataka at Dharwad Bench, presided over by Justice Hanchate Sanjeevkumar, overturned an acquittal granted by the POCSO Court, Ballari, in Special Case No.684/2018. The case involved allegations of sexual assault on a minor, with the accused charged under several sections of the IPC and the POCSO Act.

Justice Sanjeevkumar, in his detailed judgment, heavily criticized the approach of the lower court, describing it as “completely erroneous, perverse and inhuman.” The judgment underscored the need for sensitive handling of cases involving minors, especially in the context of sexual offenses. The High Court found that the POCSO Court had failed to appreciate the evidence in its proper perspective, leading to an unjustifiable acquittal.

The case’s facts revealed that the accused was charged with sexually assaulting an 8 and ½-year-old child. The High Court, after reassessing the evidence, found the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses, including the victim and her family, credible despite minor discrepancies. Consequently, the accused was convicted for offenses under Sections 354A and 354B of the IPC and Sections 7, 8, 9, and 10 of the POCSO Act.

In a stinging observation, Justice Sanjeevkumar noted that the POCSO Court judge showed a lack of sensitivity and professionalism in handling the case. He recommended that the judge undergo training at the Karnataka Judicial Academy to better handle such sensitive cases in the future.

The High Court’s judgment also directed the District Legal Services Authority to pay compensation of Rs. 5,00,000 to the minor victim under the Karnataka Victim Compensation Scheme. In addition to reversing the acquittal, the court imposed rigorous imprisonment and fines under the relevant sections of the IPC and POCSO Act.

Date of Decision: 18th December 2023

STATE OF KARNATAKA VS VENKATESH @ VENKAPPA

 

Latest Legal News