- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52551 CRL.A No. 1830 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1830 OF 2025 (A) BETWEEN: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, BANTWAL SUB-DIVISION, BANTWAL, D K, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560001. …APPELLANT (BY SRI B LAKSHMAN, HCGP) AND: 1. SRI TEJAS, S/O GANESH POOJARY, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/AT BENGATTHODI MANE, KAVALAPADUR VILLAGE, BANTWAL TALUK - 574211. 2. SMT. PADMAVATHI, W/O LINGAPPA NAIK, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, BENGATHODI HOUSE, KARANGA POST, KAVALAPADUR VILLAGE, BANTWAL TALUK - 574211. …RESPONDENTS THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 378(1)(3) CR.PC (FILED U/S 419(1 AND 3) BNSS) BY THE SPP FOR THE STATE PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO 1.GRANT LEAVE TO APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED 24.01.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-1 (SPL.COURT FOR POCSO CASES) D.K MANGALURU IN Digitally signed by C HONNUR SAB Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52551 CRL.A No. 1830 of 2025 SPL.C.NO.113/2024 ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT-ACCUSED OF THE CHARGED OFFENCE P/U/S 448,354A (i),323,504,506 OF IPC R/W SEC.7,8 OF POCSO ACT AND SEC.3(1)(s),3(1)(w)(i) AND 3(2)(va) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT AND ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA ORAL JUDGMENT The State has preferred this appeal under Section 378(1) and (3) of Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Cr.P.C.') and Section 419 (1) and (3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 (for short 'BNSS') against the judgment of acquittal passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-I (Special Court for POCSO Cases), Dakshina Kannada, Mangaluru. 2. Along with this appeal an application in I.A.No.1/2025 under Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963 is filed to condone the delay of 200 days in filing this appeal. This application is supported with the affidavit of Sri.B.P.Manjunatha, Law Officer (Senior)(Criminal), SC-ST Opinion Section, Office of the Director of Prosecutions and - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52551 CRL.A No. 1830 of 2025 Government Litigations, KHB Complex, 6th floor, Kaveri Bhavana, Bengaluru - 560 009. In the affidavit, it is stated that the Special Case No.113/2024 was conducted by the Special Public Prosecutor of Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-I (Special Court for POCSO cases), DK Mangaluru. The certified copies of the Judgment was applied on 24.01.2025 and was received the same on 04.02.2025, which was sent for opinion on 10.02.2025 to the Law Officer (Senior), Mangalore and the Law Officer (Senior), sent his opinion on 14.02.2025 to the IGP, IGP sent his opinion on 14.02.2025 to the Director of Prosecutions and Government Litigations. Their office received the same on 15.03.2025. The Law Officer (Senior) of the Directorate has given his opinion on 26.03.2025 and the opinion file has been sent to Government on 26.03.2025 for final decision, since all have opined that the case is fit case for preferring appeal. The Government also opined the same on 04.08.2025 in its letter vide No.HD:2275:HCP-1:2025 by authorizing State Public Prosecutor, to prefer the above appeal. Further, it is stated that as the file was required to pass through so many officers - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52551 CRL.A No. 1830 of 2025 and sections in their office and in the Government Secretariat before passing an order to prefer an appeal against the impugned judgment, hence there was delay of 200 days in preferring the appeal. The said delay is not intentional but for the bonafide reasons. On all these grounds, sought to condone the delay of 200 days in preferring the appeal. 3. I have examined the materials placed before the Court. 4. The State has preferred this appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC -I (Special Court for POCSO Cases), Dakshina Kannada, Mangaluru in Special Case No.113/2024 dated 24.01.2025. 5. The Trial Court has acquitted the accused for the commission of offences under Sections 448, 354A(i), 323, 504 and 506 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC'), under Sections 7 and 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short 'POCSO Act') and under - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52551 CRL.A No. 1830 of 2025 Sections 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w)(i) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989 (for short 'SC/ST (POA) Act'). 6. Section 14A of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989 which was inserted by Act 1 of 2016, Section 9 (with effect from 26.01.2016 vide S.O.No.152(E) dated 18th January 2016), reads as under: 14A. Appeals .- (1 ) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), an appeal shall lie, from any judgment sentence or order, not being an interlocutory order, of a Special Court or an Exclusive Special Court, to the High Court both on facts and on law. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub- section (3) of Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), an appeal shall lie to the High Court against an order of the Special Court or the Exclusive Special Court granting or refusing bail. (3) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, every appeal under this section shall be preferred within a period of ninety - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52551 CRL.A No. 1830 of 2025 days from the date of judgment, sentence or order appealed from: Provided that the High Court may entertain an appeal after the expiry of the said period of ninety days if it is satisfied that the appellant had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal within the period of ninety days. Provided further that no appeal shall be entertained after the expiry of the period of one hundred and eighty days. (4) Every appeal preferred under sub-section (1) shall, as far as possible, be disposed of within a period of three months from the date of admission of the appeal." 7. In the case on hand, the alleged incident took place on 21.03.2024 and Case was registered in Special Case No.113/2024 on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-I (Special Court for POCSO Cases), Dakshina Kannada, Mangaluru. 8. Since the offences are pertaining to the penal provisions of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989, the appeal shall lie from any judgment, sentence or order not being an interlocutory order, of a Special Court or an exclusive Special Court, to the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52551 CRL.A No. 1830 of 2025 High Court, both on facts and on law under Section 14A of SC/ST (POA) Act. 9. Though there is a special provision to institute the appeal against the judgment of the Trial Court under Section 14A of the SC/ST (POA) Act, the State has preferred this appeal under Section 378(1) and (3) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 419(1) and (3) of BNSS, 2023. 10. In view of Section 14A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989, this Court cannot entertain an appeal after the expiry of period of 90 days. In view of sub-section 3 of Section 14A of the SC/ST (POA) Act, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, every appeal under this section shall be preferred within a period of ninety days from the date of judgment, sentence or order appealed from. 11. In the case on hand, after lapse of 200 days, the State has preferred this appeal. Hence, the application cannot be entertained after lapse of 180 days by this Court. Even with regard to merits of this application is concerned, - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52551 CRL.A No. 1830 of 2025 the State has not produced any acceptable legal materials before this Court to condone the delay of 200 days. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) I.A. No. 1/2025 filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963 seeking condonation of 200 days caused in filing the appeal is dismissed. (ii) Consequently, the Criminal Appeal is also dismissed. Sd/- (G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE GVP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22