- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1042-DB CRL.A No. 1215 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1215 OF 2025 (A) BETWEEN: STATE BY AJJAMPURA POLICE CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001. …APPELLANT (BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, ADDITONAL S.P.P.) AND: 1. SRIDHARA S/O. MAHALINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS RESIDING AT PILLAJIANAHALLI VILLAGE JAVAGANAHALLI HOBLI, HIRIYURU TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 501. 2. CHIKKANNA S/O. HULAGANA CHITHAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS RESIDING AT KADUR TALUK CHOULAHIRIYURU NOW AT PILLAJJANAHALLI VILLAGE JAVAGANAHALLI HOBLI HIRIYURU TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 501. Digitally signed by MOUNESHWARAPPA NAGARATHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1042-DB CRL.A No. 1215 of 2025 3. BALANNA S/O. SANNAPPA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS RESIDING AT VEERAPURA HOSURU AJJAMPURA TALUK. PRESENTLY AT PILLAJJANNAHALLI VILLAGE JAVAGANAHALLI HOBLI HIRIYURU TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 501. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI LAKSHMIKANTH K., ADVOCATE, FOR R-3, & R-1 AND 2 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) * * * THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378(1) AND (3) OF THE CR.P.C, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 3-4-2024 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-I, AT CHIKKAMAGALURU IN SPL.C.NO.81 OF 2023 ACQUITTING ACCUSED NO.1/RESPONDENT NO.1 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 366, 343 AND 376(3) OF IPC AND SECTIONS 6 AND 8 OF POCSO ACT, AND ACCUSED NO.2/RESPONDENT NO.2 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 366A OF IPC AND SECTION 17 OF POCSO ACT. THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1042-DB CRL.A No. 1215 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH) This matter is listed for Admission. On perusal of the material on record, it appears that PW1 and PW2 have supported the case of the prosecution. 2. Though PW2-victim submits that she was subjected to sexual act thrice by accused No.1, but the evidence of the Doctor is very clear that when the victim was examined, her hymen was intact. Hence, the trial Court at paragraph No.19 of its judgment has clearly held that "the victim's evidence is not reliable without corroboration. There is no medical evidence to support the victim's assertion that she being sexually assaulted. Before the Doctor, the victim told that accused No.1 committed sexual assault on her thrice". The same contention is asserted even before the Court. However, the evidence of the Doctor is very clear that "hymen of the victim found intact. The intactness of the hymen also creates doubt as it is the assertion of the victim that accused No.1 committed the sexual intercourse thrice at one night". - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1042-DB CRL.A No. 1215 of 2025 3. Learned Addl. SPP appearing for the State as well as the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 would contend that the victim was aged 13 years and to support her evidence, Headmaster was examined as PW14. In the case on hand, there is no dispute with regard to the date of birth of the victim, the victim also admitted for 8th standard and her date of birth was entered on the basis of the Transfer Certificate. 4. While considering the offences which have been invoked against the accused, there must be prima-facie material to come to a conclusion that the victim was subjected to sexual act. When the hymen of the victim was intact, subjecting her for sexual intercourse thrice at one night cannot be accepted. The evidence of PW2-victim was not corroborated with the medical evidence and hence, taking note of the said facts, the trial Court acquitted accused No.1. 5. Further, the trial Court has also clearly discussed the role played by accused No.2 at paragraph No.22 of its judgment with regard to kidnapping is concerned. The victim, in her evidence, has stated that only accused No.1 had taken her. When such material is considered by the trial Court and - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1042-DB CRL.A No. 1215 of 2025 appreciated the evidence in a proper perspective, we do not find any grounds to admit the appeal. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE AM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9