- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:17410 CRL.A No. 1352 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1352 OF 2023 BETWEEN: 1. VARUN S/O LATE PAPANNA AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS R/AT KASHI LAYOUT SHIVAKUMAR LAYOUT KAGGALIPURA TOWN UTTARAHALLI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK-560 062. PERMANENTLY R/AT NO.173, VENKATAPURAM NAGONDAPALLI, KRISHNAGIRI TAMIL NADU – 635 110. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. GANESHA K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KAGGALIPURA POLICE REPRESENTED BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU – 560 001. 2. SMT. SHWETHA W/O LATE SHIVAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/AT KASHI LAYOUT SHIVAKUMAR LAYOUT Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:17410 CRL.A No. 1352 of 2023 KAGGALIPURA TOWN UTTARAHALLI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK–560 062. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, ADDL SPP FOR R1; R2 – SERVED) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 374(2) OF CR.PC PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE DATED 18.03.2023 PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-1, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU IN SPL.C.NO.495/2021, CONVICTING THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 6 OF POCSO ACT. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL JUDGMENT Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned additional SPP for the respondent No.1-State. 2. Earlier, a direction was given to verify with regard to age of the appellant. Learned counsel for the appellant claims that accused is also a juvenile and Transfer Certificate is also placed before the Court issued by the Government Pre- - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:17410 CRL.A No. 1352 of 2023 university College, Kaggalipura and his Date of Birth is mentioned as 05.04.2004 and learned counsel for the appellant has also filed a memo along with documents furnished by the Head Master of Government Higher Secondary School, Peddabelagondappely, Krishnagiri District, Tamil Nadu and crime has occurred when he was 17 years 2 months and the fact that he was a juvenile was not brought to notice of the Trial Court by both learned counsel for the appellant and learned Additional SPP for the respondent No.1-State. 3. Now, on verification of the documents, it is clear that as on the date of alleged date of committing of offence, the accused was a minor aged about 17 years 2 months. When such being the material on record, the very conducting of case before the special Court in Spl.C.No.495/2021 is without jurisdiction and the same ought to have been considered by the Juvenile Court, since both the victim as well as the accused are juvenile. When such being the case, the judgment of conviction is not sustainable in the eye of law. Hence, it requires interference of this Court. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:17410 CRL.A No. 1352 of 2023 4. In view of the discussion made above, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The criminal appeal is allowed. (ii) The impugned judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court in Spl.C.No.495/2021 is hereby set aside and matter is to be considered afresh by the Juvenile Court. Hence, the Investigating Officer is directed to submit the charge-sheet before the Juvenile Court, forthwith and the appellant is ordered to be released, forthwith. I.A.No.1/2023 for suspension of sentence and bail do not survive for consideration and the same stands disposed of. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE ST List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31