BEFORE THE CHILD FRIENDLY COURT,

BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT.

Dated this the, 15 th day of October, 2019.
Present: SMT.R.SHARADA,B.A. M.L
LIV ADDL., CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, [CCH:55]
SITTING IN CHILD FRIENDLY COURT,
BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT.

SPL CC NO.644/2017
COMPLAINANT: State by Vijayangar Police,
Bangalore City.
(By Learned Public Prosecutor)
-Vs -
ACCUSED: Rajanna @ Rajkumar,
Aged 70 Years,
Residing at No.17, 17th Main Road,
Vijaynagar, Bangalore.

[By Advocate Ms.Jyothi Lakshmi]

1. Date of commission of 19.9.2017

offence
2. Date of report of occurrence 19.9.2017
of the offence
3. Date of arrest of accused 19/20.9.2017 in the night at 3.15 A.M.
Since the date of his arrest, till date, the
accused is in the judicial custody
4. Date of commencement of 10.5.2019
evidence
5. Date of closing of evidence 3.10.2019
6. Name of the complainant Smt.Chandrakala, complainant as well as
the mother of the victim girl
7. Offences complained of Sec.376 of IPC and Secs. 5(m), 6 of
[as per the charge-sheet ] POCSO Act, 2012.

8. Opinion of the Judge The accused is convicted for the offence

punishable under Sec.8 of POCSO Act,
2012.
 2 Spl CC No.644/2017

JUDGEMENT
The Police Inspector, Vijayanagar police station has filed
charge-sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under
Sec.376 of IPC and Secs. 5(m), 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.

2. It is the case of the prosecution that, on 19.9.2017 in

the afternoon at about 12 P.M., when CW2 being the minor
daughter of CW1 who was aged 7 years, was playing in front of her
house bearing No.16, situated at 17 th Main, Club Road, KHB
Colony, Bangalore coming within the jurisdiction of Vijayanagar
police station, the accused being the resident of the same locality,
lured her with Rs.20/- and took her to vacant house, threatened
her and removed her clothes including her undergarment, pulled
her hands, hugged her and pulled her on him with an intent to
have sexual intercourse with her. Initially on the basis of the
complaint lodged by the complainant who is none other than the
mother of the victim girl, stating about the sexual act of the
accused on her minor daughter/ victim girl, the complainant police
have registered a case against the accused in Cr.No.547/2017 for
the offences punishable under Sec.376 of IPC and Secs. 3, 4, 5(L)
and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 and continued with the investigation by
arresting the accused, taking him to remand and remanding him to
the judicial custody. After completion of investigation, the
Investigation Officer has filed charge-sheet against the accused for
the offences punishable under Se accused has committed an
offence punishable under Sec.376 of IPC and Secs. 5(m), 6 of
POCSO Act, 2012.
 3 Spl CC No.644/2017

3. During the course of investigation, the accused was

arrested on 19/20.9.2017 and since then, till date, the accused is
in the judicial custody. Thereafter copies of the charge-sheet was
furnished to the accused under Sec.207 of Cr.PC. Thereafter
Charges are framed and read over and explained to the accused, to
which, the accused pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried.
Accordingly, summons issued to the charge-sheet witnesses.

4. The prosecution has examined as many as 16 witnesses

as PWS-1 to 16 and got marked 20 documents as Exs.P1 to P20
besides marking MOS-1 to 5. Thereafter Statement of the accused
recorded under Sec.313 of Cr.P.C. The accused has denied all the
incriminating evidence told to him, but he has not examined any
witnesses on his behalf and no documents are marked.

5. Heard the arguments of the learned Public Prosecutor

and the learned counsel for the accused. On perusal of the oral
and documentary evidence, at this stage, following Points arise for
my consideration:

1. Whether the prosecution proves that, on 19.9.2017

in the afternoon at about 12 P.M., when CW2 being
the minor daughter of CW1 who was aged 7 years,
was playing in front of her house bearing No.16,
situated at 17th Main, Club Road, KHB Colony,
Bangalore coming within the jurisdiction of
Vijayanagar police station, the accused herein being
the resident of the same locality, lured her with
Rs.20/- and took her to vacant house, threatened her
and removed her clothes including her
 4 Spl CC No.644/2017

undergarment, pulled her hands, hugged her and

pulled her on him with an intent to have sexual
intercourse with her, thereby the accused has
committed the offence punishable under
Sec.376 of IPC and the offence coming within
the purview of Sec.5(m) of POCSO Act, 2012
punishable under Sec.6 of the said Act?

2) What Order?

6. My findings on the above points are as under:

POINT NO.1 : In the AFFIRMATIVE, holding that the
accused is liable for conviction for the offence,
punishable under Sec.8 of POCSO Act, 2012.

POINT NO .2: As per the final order, for the following:

REASONS

7. POINT NO.1:- During the course of arguments, the

learned Public Prosecutor during the course of arguments
submitted that, the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused,
beyond all reasonable doubts. PW2 the Victim girl who is aged
about 9 years has spoken to the criminal act committed by the
accused. PWS-1 and 3 are her parents though they are hearsay
witnesses but supported the case of the prosecution. PW4 the
mahazar witness has also supported the case of the prosecution
and he has deposed that, the police have drawn a Mahazar
CWS-1 and 6 and the Victim girl were present at that time and he
had identified his signature as per Ex.P4(b). Of course, one
mahazar witness PW6 has not supported the case of the
prosecution, however she has identified the accused. The other
witnesses are official witnesses who have supported the case of the
 5 Spl CC No.644/2017

prosecution in conducting medical examination on the accused and

the Victim girl, recording the statements, and also conducting
investigation finally filed charge-sheet. Considering all these
evidence the accused is liable to be convicted for the charges, as
levelled against him. With these, the learned Public Prosecutor
prays to convict the accused in the interest of justice and equity.

8. Per contra, the learned counsel for the accused during the
course of arguments submitted that, the prosecution has failed to
prove the guilt of the accused for the alleged ofences punishable
under Sec.6 of POCSO Act, 2012 beyond all reasonable doubts
because none of the prosecution witnesses have deposed that the
accused had committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault on
the Victim girl. Even the Victim girl herself has not stated a single
word against the accused in tsi regard. The statement recorded by
the Magistrate under Sec.164 of Cr.P.C and also the evidence given
before the court, clearly shows that, the accused has not at all c
committed the offences as per the charges levelled against him.
Further she submitted that, no doubt the earlier counsel who was
appearing for the accused has not subjected PWS-1 to 3 for
cross-examination but on looking into the evidence of these
witnesses while they were examined by the prosecution , no iota of
evidence could be found against the accused for having committed
the grave offence as alleged by the prosecution. Apart from that
the accused is aged about 70 years, having grand-children, such
being the situation it is highly impossible to believe the accused
that he had committed such a serious act against the Victim girl
 6 Spl CC No.644/2017

who is just aged about 9 years. The other witnesses are all official
witnesses they have deposed before the court according to their
duties discharged by them. When the evidence of PWS-1 to 3 is not
convincing the court to link the accused for the offence, only on
the basis of evidence given by the official witnesses, the accused
cannot be convicted. Further she submitted that, of course there is
a presumption under Sec.29 of POCSO Act, 2012 which casts
burden on the accused but the preliminary burden is on the
prosecution to prove its case to this extent, the prosecution
miserably failed. Thereby, she prays to acquit the accused in the
interest of justice and equity.

9. The prosecution in order to bring home the guilt of the

accused has examined totally 16 witnesses as PWS-1 to 16. Out
of them, PW1/CW1 is the complainant as well as mother of the
victim girl who set criminal law into motion by filing the complaint
as per Ex.P1. PW2/CW2 is the victim girl .PW3/CW3 is the father
of the victim girl. PW4/CW5 is the witness to the spot mahazar as
per Ex.P4. PW5/CW7 is the Lady doctor who examined the victim
girl physically. PW6/CW6 is the owner of the house wherein
CWS-1 to 3 are residing as tenants. PW7/CW12 is the PC who has
traced out the accused. PW8/CW10 is the Woman PC who took the
victim girl to the Vani Vilas Hospital for medical examination.
PW9/CW8 is the Doctor who has examined the accused physically.
PW10/CW14 is the HC who took the sealed articles of this case to
RFSL, Mysore. PW11/CW11 is the PC who took the accused of
this case to Victoria Hospital for medical examination.
 7 Spl CC No.644/2017

PW12/CW20 is the Police Inspector/ Investigation Officer of this

case who has filed charge-sheet against the accused.
PW13/CW18 is the PSI who is the preliminary Investigation Officer
Of this case. PW14/CW19 is also one of the Investigation Officer
of this case who conducted almost all parts of investigation.
PW15/CW9 is the SJPU Co-ordinator who has done counselling of
the victim girl and PW16/CW16 is the Woman PSI who has
recorded the statement of the victim girl. In support of its case, the
prosecution has also produced the following documents: Ex.P1 is
the complaint. Ex.P2 is the Seizure Mahazar. Ex.P3 is the
Statement of the victim girl given before the complainant police
under Sec.161 of Cr.P.C. Ex.P4 is the spot panchanama. Ex.P5 is
the OPD Slips [2 in numbers]. Ex.P6 is the Radiological Report of
the victim girl. Ex.P7 and P8 are the Letters. Ex.P9 is the FSL
Report. Ex.P10 is the Final Medical Report of the victim girl.
Ex.P11 is the Statement of PW6 given before the complainant
police under Sec.161 of Cr.P.C. Ex.P12 is the Report. Ex.P13 is
the Report. Ex.P14 is the Medical report of the accused. Ex.P15 is
the Acknowledgement issued by RFSL, Mysore. Ex.P16 is the FIR.
Ex.P17 is the sezuire panchanama. Ex.P18 is the birth certificate
of the victim girl. Ex.P19 is the Counselling report of the vg and
Ex.P20 is the statement given by the victim girl before the
Magistrate under Sec.164 of Cr.P.C.

10. Before evaluating the evidence given by the prosecution

witnesses, I would like to bifurcate these witnesses into 2 groups.
The first group consists of the mother and the father of the victim
 8 Spl CC No.644/2017

girl and the victim girl who are examined as PWS-1 to 3, PW5-the
Lady doctor, who examined the Victim girl physically, PW15- the
SJPU co-ordinator who has done counselling of the Victim girl and
the PW16 the Woman PSI who has recorded the statement of the
Victim girl. The second group consists of police officials,
mahazar witness, Investigation Officer and other witnesses.

11. Now coming to the evaluation of the evidence given by the

first group of the prosecution witnesses , I would like to firstly take
up the evidence of PW1- Chandrakala- complainant as well as the
mother of the victim girl and also PW3-Lokesh
the father of the victim girl In their evidence before the court,
they have stated the CW2 is their daughter. They know the
accused and they have identified the accused in the accused
platform located in the court hall. Two years back to the date of
giving evidence by PW2, she had lodged a
a complaint. At that time, the age of their daughter was 7 years.
The said complaint is marked as Ex.P1 and the signature of PW1
is marked as Ex.P1(a). On the date of lodging of the complaint,
Pws-1 and 2 had gone to their work. PW1 returned back to the
house at 12.30 P.M., her daughter was not at home. She
searched for her daughter, but she was not traced out. Thereafter,
her daughter was in her aunt's house. She brought back her
daughter to the house. Before that, one Sarojamma told her that
the accused had taken her daughter to his house. When enquired
with her daughter, her daughter told that, the accused had taken
her to his house, gagged her mouth, removed her clothes and slept
 9 Spl CC No.644/2017

on her and she told that her stomach is paining. The hairs of her
daughter was scattered. She informed this to her husband and
later she lodged a complaint. After lodging of the complaint, the
police had come near her house and conducted mahazar as per
Ex.P2 and her signature is marked as Ex.P2(a). She took her
daughter to the police station and they enquired her daughter. Her
daughter had told as to what the accused had did with her. The
statement given by her daughter under Sec.161 of Cr.P.C is marked
as Ex.P3 and the signature of this witness is marked as Ex.3(a)
and the signature of her daughter is marked as Ex.P3(b). The
police had conducted mahazar in House No.16 where the incident
had taken place and the said mahazar is marked as Ex.P4 and her
signature is marked as Ex.P4(a). Likewise, She has also given
further statement to the police. PW2 is the Victim girl. The
victim girl was tested as to her capability of giving her evidence as
she was aged only 9 years old as on the date of giving her evidence.
In her chief examination, PW2 has deposed that, CW1 is her
mother and CW3 is her father. Earlier she was residing in
Vijayangar KHB Colony and at present she is residing in
Byadrahalli. The complaint is lodged by her parents. When she
was questioned as to why complaint was lodged, she has answered
that, when she was studying in 1 st standard, she was playing
near her owner aunty's house at that that the time, the accused
took her to the owner aunty's house. At that time, the owner aunty
was not in the house. The accused took her and removed her
clothes. The accused had told her that he will give money so she
had gone with him. The accused removed her clothes and made
 10 Spl CC No.644/2017

her sleep on a table and he slept on her and touched her hands
and legs. So, she was suffering from stomach ache. The accused
gagged her mouth, she do not as to why. She went to the house of
Jayamma. There in the said house Jayamma and her husband
were there. As there was severe stomach ache, she told the same
to her mother-CW1. Thereafter her[PW2] parents took her to the
police station and there the police enquired with her and she told
all the above things. PW2 has identified Ex.P3 and her signature
on it as Ex.P3(a). Thereafter the police sent her to the hospital
along with the police staff and her parents. These three witnesses
were not cross-examined by the learned counsel for the accused.
Thereby, their evidence remained un-controverted.

12. PW5-Dr.Shashikala.B.Patil is the lady Doctor who has

examined the victim girl. In her evidence before the court she has
deposed that, on 20.9.2017 at 3.10 A.M., she has examined the
victim girl aged about 7 years sent by Vijayanagar police through
WPC along with her mother with the history of sexual assault on
19.9l2017 at about 12 noon by one Rajanna. After taking the
consent of the mother of the victim girl, she has examined the
victim girl. On physical examination she found that the victim girl
ws developed according to her age. On genital examination she
found that there was no external injuries and Hymen of the victim
girl was not intact. After examining the patient, she has advised
radiology examination for age estimation of the victim girl and
Department of Pediatrics for further. She has got marked the OPD
Slips [2 in numbers] as Ex.P5. The Age Estimation Report of the
 11 Spl CC No.644/2017

victim girl is marked as EX.P6 and the Letter written to the

Department of Radiology is marked as Ex.P7 and her signature is
marked as Ex.P7(a). The Letter written to Department of Pediatrics
is marked as Ex.P8 and her signature is marked as Ex.P8(a). This
witness has also got marked FSL Report as Ex.P9. Based on the
FSL Report, she has issued the Final Report which is marked as
Ex.P10 and her signature is marked as Ex.P10(a). Further she has
opined that there was no signs of recent sexual intercourse. She
can identify the articles collected at the time of examination, if they
are shown to her. In her cross-examination by the accused
himself, she has denied that, she has not examined the victim
girl. She has also denied that the police have not brought the
victim girl before her. She has also denied that she has not issued
Ex.P10. She has also denied that, all the documents are issued
upon the request of the Investigation Officer. She has also denied
that, she is deposing falsely.

13. PW15-Kavitha, SJPU Co-ordinator in her evidence before

the court has deposed that, on 20.7.2017, Vijayanagar police
called her and told to record the statement of the victim girl of this
case. So, she came to the said station and there the victim girl
and her mother and a woman PSI and a woman PC were there.
She done counselling of the victim girl. The victim girl in her
counselling has stated that on 19.9.2017, when she was playing
near her house, the accused being the neighbour of the victim
girl's house, came to the house of the victim girl, by seeing that
none were in her house, took the victim girl to the massage room
 12 Spl CC No.644/2017

and forcibly removed the clothes of the victim girl and when the
victim girl shouted, the accused gagged her mouth and put his
private part into the private part of the victim girl at that time, the
victim girl screamed, the accused told the victim girl not to disclose
the said incident to anyone. By that time, the neighouirng owner
came and the accused ran away. The victim girl being afraid of this
did not go to her house, but went to her aunt's ( ಅತತತ ) house and
later her mother came there and brought her back to her house.
The said statement given by the victim girl is marked as Ex.P19
and the signature of this witness is marked as Ex.P19(b). Thereby,
this witness has performed her statutory duty by recording the
statement of the victim girl. In her cross-examination by the
accused himself, she has denied all the suggestions put to her as
false and further she denied that she is deposing falsely.

14. PW16- Pallavi, is the Woman PSI, who has deposed in

her evidence before the court that in 20.9.2017, when she was on
her duty, as per the orders of her higher officers, she went to
Vijayanagar police station to record the statement of the victim girl
of this case. The victim girl gave her statement as per Ex.P3 and
her signature is marked as Ex.P3(d). The victim girl in her
statement has stated that on 19.9.2017, when she was playing
near her owner's house, the accused luring her with Rs.20/- took
her to a house and forcibly removed the clothes of the victim girl
and committed sexual assault on her and at that time, the victim
girl screamed, and the neighbouring aunty came and scolded the
accused. Thereafter the victim girl went to her aunt's house ( ಅತತತ )
 13 Spl CC No.644/2017

and later her mother came there and brought her back to her
house. All these things were typed by this witness and she handed
over the same to Police Inspector. The victim girl has given her
statement as per Ex.P3 before her. [PW16]. Thereby, this witness
has performed her statutory duty by recording the statement of
the victim girl. In her cross-examination by the accused himself,
she has denied all the suggestions put to her and finally she denied
that, she is deposing falsely.

15. Now coming to the evidence given by the 2nd group.

PW4- Lokesh is a witness to the spot Mahazar which is marked as
Ex.P4. In his evidence before the court he has deposed that,
2 years back to the date of giving his evidence, police had secured
him near the house of CW6. There in the said house the police
conducted Mahazar and obtained his signature. The said Mahazar
is marked as Ex.P4 and his signature is marked as Ex.P4(b). The
publics who were there told that, the victim girl was subjected to
rape. In his cross-examination by the accused himself, this
witness has denied all the suggestions put to him and finally he
denied that, he is deposing falsely.

16. PW6-Sarojamma, is an eyewitness to the incident and

was the owner of the house where CWS-1 to 3 are residing as
tenants. In her evidence except identifying the accused before the
court, she has not told anything in favour of the prosecution.
Though this witness subjected for cross-examination by the
Learned Public Prosecutor nothing is elicited from her mouth by
 14 Spl CC No.644/2017

the prosecution to support its case. Thereby the evidence of this

witness is no way helpful to the case of the prosecution.

17. PW9- Dr.M.B.Pradeep Kumar, Asst. Professor Dept. of

Forensic Medicine, Victoria Hospital, Bangalore has deposed that,
on 20.9.2017 at 2.45 P.M., he has examined the accused person
by name Rajanna aged 70 years and issuance of Medical Certificate
as per Ex.P14 and also identified his signature as Ex.P14(a).
PW10- Srinivasamurthy- Head Constable has deposed before the
court that, on 17.11.2017, as per the instructions of the
Investigation Officer, he has taken the 8 sealed articles seized in
this case to RFSL, Mysore and obtained Acknowledgement and
produced the said Acknowledgement before the Investigation
Officer and given his statement. Since the age and health of the
accused and forwarding sealed articles to the RFSL and obtaining
acknowledgement are not in dispute, I feel there is no any
necessity to discuss the evidence of theses witnesses.

18. PW7-Sameer Mirzannavar, Police Constable in his

evidence before the court has deposed that, on 19.9.2017, CW19
had deputed him, CWS-13 and 17 to trace out the accused. As per
the information given by the informant, they traced out the
accused in the midnight at 1.30 A.M., ie., on 20.9.2017 and took
him to their custody and produced the accused before CW19 and
he has given Report in this regard. The Report is marked as Ex.P12
and his signature is marked as Ex.P12(a). Thereby, this witness
has performed his statutory duty by apprehending the accused.
 15 Spl CC No.644/2017

In his cross-examination by the accused himself, this witness has

denied all the suggestions put to him and finally denied that, he is
deposing falsely.

19. PW8-Vidya Saptasagar, Woman Police constable in her

evidence before the court has deposed that, on 20.9.2017, as per
the orders of Police Inspector/ CW19 she took the victim girl of this
case to Vani Vilas Hospital for medical examination. After her
medical examination, she has brought back the victim girl to the
police station and produced her before CW19. Further he has
deposed that, on 10.10.2017, as per the orders of CW19, she has
collected 2 articles from Vani Vilas Hospital pertaining to the victim
girl and handed them over to CW19 and she has given Report in
that regard which is marked as Ex.P13 and her signature is
marked as Ex.P13(a). Thereby, this witness has performed her
statutory duty by taking the victim girl to the hospital for medical
examination. In her cross-examination by the accused himself,
this witness has denied all the suggestions put to her and finally
she has also denied that, she has given false Report .

20. PW11- Prakash Harappanahalli, Police Constable has

deposed in his evidence that, on 20.9.2017, he was deputed by the
Police Inspector/CW19 to take the accused for medical examination
to Victoria Hospital. As per the instructions of CW19, he took the
accused to the said hospital and after the examination, he has
brought back the accused to the police station and produced him
before CW19. Accordingly, he has given the Statement. He has
 16 Spl CC No.644/2017

identify the accused in the court hall as to the person whom he

had taken for medical examination. Thereby, this witness has
performed his statutory duty by apprehending the accused. The
learned counsel for the accused was kept absent at the time of
cross-examination of this witness. In his cross-examination by the
accused himself, this witness has denied that, he has not taken
the accused for medical examination to the hospital. He has also
denied that, he has not given any statement.

21. PW13- G.P.Nagaraju, PSI is the Preliminary Investigation

Officer of this case. In his evidence before the court, he has
deposed that, on 19.9.2017, in the night at 10.30 P.M., when he
was incharge of the station, the complainant appeared before him
and lodged a Complaint as per Ex.P1 and his signature is marked
as Ex.P1(b). After receiving the complaint, he has prepared FIR
and registered a case in Cr.No.547/2017 and sent the FIR to the
jurisdictional court and copy of the same to his higher officers.
The FIR is marked as Ex.P16. Thereafter he has handed over the
case file to CW19 for further investigation. Thereby this witness
has conducted preliminary investigation of the case by receiving the
complaint and registering FIR. In his cross-examination by the
accused himself, this witness has denied all the suggestions put
to him and finally he denied that, in order to give trouble to the
accused, he has done like this.
 17 Spl CC No.644/2017

22. PW14-KrishnaMurthy.H., Police Inspector is also one of

the Investigation Officers of this case. In his evidence before the
court, he has deposed that, on 19.9.2017, in the night at
10.45 P.M., CW-18 called him and informed about this case. He
went to the station and obtained the case file of this case and
verified it. Thereafter he deputed CWS-17, 12 and 13 for tracing
out the accused and his staff have traced out the accused at
Tumkur and took him to their custody and produced the accused
before him and after completing the arrest formalities, he has
arrested the accused. Thereafter he has conducted seizure
panchanama as per Ex.P17 and his signature is marked as
Ex.P17(a). He also conducted spot mahazar as per Ex.P4. He
continued with the investigation and collected the school
documents of the victim girl as per Ex.P18 and his signature is
marked as Ex.P18(a). As per the school documents, as the victim
girl was aged 7 years he secured CW16 to the police station to
record the statement of the victim girl in the police station. The
statement of the victim girl is marked as Ex.P3 and his signature is
marked as Ex.P3(c). He sent the victim girl to the Vani Vilas
Hospital for medical examination. He also sen the accused to
Victoria hospital for medical examination. On 10.10.2017, he
obtained the medical report of the victim girl. He also obtained
the 2 sealed articles pertaining to the victim girl and subjected
them to PF No.226/2017 a per MOS-1 and 2 and his signatures are
marked as MOS-1(a) and 2(a). The Medical documents of the
victim girl are marked from Ex.P5 to P8. He has also obtained the
articles belonging to the victim girl which are subjected to
 18 Spl CC No.644/2017

PF No.227/2017 which are marked as MOS-3 to 5 and his

signatures are marked as MOS-3(a) to 5(a). On 16.10.2017, as he
was transferred, he handed over the case file of this case to CW20.
He has identified the accused through VC as to the person whom
he had arrested. Thereby, this witness has performed his
statutory duty as one of the Investigation Officers of this case. In
his cross-examination by the accused himself, this witness has
denied all the suggestions put to him and finally he denied that, he
is deposing falsely at the instance of CW1.

23. PW12- G.N.Nagesh is the Final Investigation Officer of

this case. In his evidence before the court he has stated that, on
13.10.2017 he has received the case file from CW19 and verified it.
On 16.10.2017 he received the medical report of the accused. And
also 3 articles belonging to the accused which are subjected to
PF No.231/2017. Thereafter he sent all the sealed articles of this
case to RFSL, Mysore for chemical examination. After completion
of investigation, as he found materials against the accused, he has
filed charge-sheet against the accused. He has obtained the FSL
Report on 12.12.2017 which is marked as Ex.P9. Thereby, this
witness has performed her statutory duty as Final Investigation
Officer of this case. In his cross-examination by the accused
himself,, this witness has denied that, he has not verified the
documents of this case. He has also denied that, he has filed false
charge-sheet against the accused, though there were no materials
available against the accused.
 19 Spl CC No.644/2017

24. On the basis of the evidence placed by the prosecution,

as per the above discussions, this court has to decide whether the
accused has committed the crime as charged against him or not.
Here as I have already stated above the evidence of first group of
witnesses plays prominence role in this regard to prove the case of
the prosecution. On consideration of the statement of the victim
girl given to the police under Sec.161 of Cr.P.C and the statement
said to have been recorded by SJPU Co-ordinator, the victim girl
said to had told that this accused after removing her
undergarment and the accused also after removing his
undergarment has stated to had inserted his penis into the vagina
of the victim girl. But the victim girl in her statement before the
Magistrate and in the evidence given before this court during the
course of trial, has not at all whispered anything regarding the
accused attempting or committing the act of sexual intercourse
and that her evidence points to the act of the accused falling
within the scope of Sec.7 of POCSO Act, 2012 punishable under
Sec.8 of the said Act. However, the Medial Officer examined before
this court and the Medical documents produced shows that, the
hymen of the victim girl was not in-tact that suggests as if the
victim girl was used to an act like that of sexual intercourse.
Considering the age of the victim girl as on the date of the
incident, she was being 9 years old and the time gap between the
date of crime and the date of physical examination of the victim
girl, the evidence of Doctor-PW5 and also the observation found in
the Medical certificate creates doubt with regard to the medical
evidence because the medical evidence says that there was rupture
 20 Spl CC No.644/2017

of the hymen of the victim girl, but the doctor did not notice any
kind of internal injuries over the body of the victim girl. The doctor
has also not noticed any sort of abnormalities or unnaturality in
the private part of the victim girl. The crime stated to had taken
place on 18.9.2017 and the date of medical examination of the
victim girl was on 20.9.2017. If the adult like this accused who was
aged 70 years had committed penetrative sexual assault on the
victim girl, in my view there ought to have been some injuries in
the private part of the victim girl like abrasion, tenderness,
inflammation, redness or pain etc. But, nothing of this sort is
pointed out through the medical evidence which shows that, there
is no corroboration or correlation between the rupture of hymen of
the victim girl and the complained acts of the accused. Therefore,
on the basis of the observation of absence of hymen of the victim
girl, the accused cannot be held to be guilt of the offences
punishable under Sec.376 of IPC and Sec.6 of POCSO Act, 2012,
that too in the absence of any sort of evidence given in this regard
in the trial before this court. But, as already discussed above, the
evidence of PWS-1 to 3 to the extent of the accused taking the
Victim girl into a house and removing her clothes and made her
to sleep and touching her body are not contraverted. These acts of
the accused attracts the provision under Sec.7 of POCSO Act,
2012 punishable under Sec.8 of the said Act. Apart from that, the
then Learned counsel for the accused has not subjected these
witnesses for cross-examination hence, the evidence to the extent
of accused committing the offence as narrated under Sec.7 of
POCSO Act, 2012 remained unimpeached. With this I held that
 21 Spl CC No.644/2017

the accused is liable to be convicted for the offence as defined

under Sec.7 of POCSO Act, 2012 punishable under Sec.8 of the
said Act. With this, I answer Point No.1 accordingly.

25. POINT NO.2:- In view of my findings on Point No.1, I

proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

Acting under Sec.235(2) of Cr.P.C, I hereby

convict the accused for the offence punishable

under Sec.8 of POCSO Act, 2012.

[Dictated to the Stenographer directly on the computer,

corrections carried out and then pronounced by me in the
open court on this the 15 th day of October, 2019]

[R.SHARADA]
LIV ADDL., CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, [CCH:55]
SITTING IN CHILD FRIENDLY COURT,
BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT.
 22 Spl CC No.644/2017

19.10.2019 ORDER ON SENTENCE

The accused and his counsel are present. The accused is

heard regarding sentence to be imposed on him. The accused
submitted that, he is aged about 70 years, and he has been in the
judicial custody more than 2 years, and he is suffering from old
aged ailments, thereby the accused prayed for leniency in
imposing the sentence.

Having regard to the age and health condition of the

accused and he had spent much time in the judicial custody as
UTP and also considering the crime committed by him which is not
so grievous in nature, not punishable with death or
imprisonment of life, I feel that imposing minimum sentence and
fine would meet the ends of justice. With these, I proceed to
pass the following:
SENTENCE
I hereby sentence the accused to undergo
Simple Imprisonment for a period of 3 Years and also he
is liable to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence
punishable under Sec.8 of POCSO Act, 2012. In default
of payment of fine amount, the accused shall further
undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of One Week.

The office is directed to pay entire fine amount, if it

collected, it shall be paid to the Victim girl/ PW2 by way
of compensation.
 23 Spl CC No.644/2017

Acting under Sec.428 of Cr.P.C, the period of detention

undergone by the accused is set-off against the sentence
of imprisonment imposed.

MOS-1 to 5 being worthless are ordered to be

destroyed after the appeal period is over.

A Copy of this Judgment shall be sent to District

Legal Services Authority, Bengaluru Urban, Bengaluru
to award compensation to the Victim girl/ PW2 as per
Rule 7 of POCSO Rules, 2012.

Copy of this Judgement shall be given to the accused

free of cost forthwith.

[ Sentence dictated to the Stenographer, directly on the

computer, corrections carried out and then pronounced by
me in the open court on this the 19 th day of October, 2019]

[R.SHARADA]
LIV ADDL., CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, [CCH:55]
SITTING IN CHILD FRIENDLY COURT,
BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT.

ANNEXURES:
Witnesses examined for the prosecution:

PW.1 Chandrakala CW1 10.5.2019

PW.2 Victim girl CW2 10.5.2019
PW.3 Lokesh CW3 10.5.2019
 24 Spl CC No.644/2017

PW.4 Lokesh CW5 17.7.2019

PW.5 Dr.Shashkala.B.Patil CW7 25.7.2019
PW.6 Sarojamma CW6 25.7.2019
PW.7 Sameer Mirzammavar CW12 25.7.2019
PW.8 Vidyashree Sapatasagar CW10 25.7.2019
PW.9 Dr.M.B.Pradeep Kumar CW8 26.8.2019
PW.10 Srinivasamurthy CW14 29.8.2019
PW.11 Prakash Harappanahalli CW11 29.8.2019
PW.12 G.N.Nagesh CW20 12.9.2019
PW.13 G.P.Nagaraju CW18 12.9.2019
PW.14 Krishnamurthy.H CW19 18.9.2019
PW.15 Kavitha CW9 25.9.2019
PW.16 Pallavi CW16 3.10.2019

Documents marked for the prosecution:

Ex.P1 Complaint dated: 19.9.2017 lodged by PW1-the

complainant who is none other than the mother of
the victim girl
Ex.P1(a) Signature of PW1
Ex.P1(b) Signature of PW13
Ex.P2 Seizure Panchanama
Ex.P2(a) Signature of PW1
Ex.P3 Statemetn of PW2/ victim girl given before the
complainant police under Sec.161 of Cr.P.C
Ex.P3(a) Signature of PW1
Ex.P3(b) Signature of PW2
Ex.P3(c) Signature of PW14
Ex.P3(d) Signature of PW16
Ex.P4 Spot Panchanama
Ex.P4(a) Signature of PW1
Ex.P4(b) Signature of PW4
Ex.P4(c) Signature of PW14
Ex.P4(d) Signature of CW4-SmtJayamma
Ex.P5 OPD slips [2 in numbers]
Ex.P6 Radiological Report of the victim girl/PW2
Ex.P7 Letter written to Department of Radiology,
Victoria Hospital, Bangalore
Ex.P7(a) Signature of PW5
 25 Spl CC No.644/2017

Ex.P8 Letter written to Department of Psychiatry,

Victoria Hospital, Bangalore.
Ex.P8(a) Signature of PW5
Ex.P9 FSL Report
Ex.P9(a) Signature of PW12
Ex.P10 Final Medical Report of the victim girl/ PW2
Ex.P10(a) Signature of PW5

Ex.P11 Statement of PW6 given before the complainant

police under Sec.161 of Cr.P.C
Ex.P12 Report given by CW17-K.R.Shashi, PSI 2 of the
complainant police station regarding tracing out
of the accused and producing him before the
Police Inspector of the complainant police station
Ex.P12(a) Signature of CW17-K.R.Shashi
Ex.P12(b) Signature of PW14
Ex.P13 Report given by PW8 regarding collecting of the
articles pertaining to the victim girl from the
hospital and producing the same before the
Police Inspector of the complainant police station
Ex.P13(a) Signature of PW8

Ex.P14 Medical Report of the accused

Ex.P14(a) Signature of Pw9
Ex.P15 Acknowledgement issued by RFSL, Mysore for
having received the sealed articles of this case
from the complainant police
Ex.P16 FIR
Ex.P17 Seizure panchanama
Ex.P17(a) Signature of PW14
Ex.P18 Birth certificate of the victim girl/ PW2
Ex.P18(a) Signature of PW14
Ex.P19 Statement of the victim girl/ PW2 given before
the SJPU
Ex.P19(a) Signature of PW14
Ex.P19(b) Signature of PW15
Ex.P20 Statement of the victim girl/ PW2 given before
the Magistrate under Sec.164 of Cr.P.C
Ex.P20(a) Signature of PW14
 26 Spl CC No.644/2017

Material Objects marked for the prosecution:

MOs-1 and 2 Sealed articles as per PF No.226/2017

MOs-1(a) Signatures of PW14

and 2(a)

MO-3 Coffee colour Middy

MO-4 One top

MO-5 Underwear

MOS-3(a) Signatures of PW14

to 5(a)

Witness examined, documents and MOs marked for the accused: NIL

[R.SHARADA]
LIV ADDL., CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, [CCH:55]
SITTING IN CHILD FRIENDLY COURT,
BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT.
 27 Spl CC No.644/2017

15.10.2019

Judgment pronounced in open court:

[ Vide separate detailed Judgment]

Acting under Sec.235(2) of Cr.P.C, I

hereby convict the accused for the offence

punishable under Sec.8 of POCSO Act,

2012.

[R.SHARADA]]
LIV ADDL., CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, [CCH:55]
SITTING IN CHILD FRIENDLY COURT,
BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT.
 28 Spl CC No.644/2017

19.10.2019 Sentence pronounced in open court:

[ Vide separate detailed Sentence]

I hereby sentence the accused to

undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period
of 3 Years and also he is liable to pay fine
of Rs.1,000/- for the offence punishable
under Sec.8 of POCSO Act, 2012. In
default of payment of fine amount, the
accused shall further undergo Simple
Imprisonment for a period of One Week.

The office is directed to pay entire fine

amount, if it collected, it shall be paid to
the Victim girl/ PW2 by way of
compensation.

Acting under Sec.428 of Cr.P.C, the period

of detention undergone by the accused is
set-off against the sentence of
imprisonment imposed.

MOS-1 to 5 being worthless are ordered to

be destroyed after the appeal period is over.
 29 Spl CC No.644/2017

A Copy of this Judgment shall be sent to

District Legal Services Authority, Bengaluru
Urban, Bengaluru to award compensation
to the Victim girl/ PW2 as per Rule 7 of
POCSO Rules, 2012.

Copy of this Judgement shall be given to

the accused free of cost forthwith.

[R.SHARADA]
LIV ADDL., CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, [CCH:55]
SITTING IN CHILD FRIENDLY COURT,
BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT.
30 Spl CC No.644/2017