Kum. Suma A J, v. State of Karnataka

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 677 OF 2025

Between:

Kum. Suma A.J., D/o. Late Gurusiddachari, Aged about 38 years, R/at Ayarahalli Village, Varuna Hobli, Mysuru - 570 010 …Appellant (By Sri Tejas N., Advocate)

And:

¶1State of Karnataka By Varuna Police Station, Mysuru - 570 010.

(Represented by Learned State Public Prosecutor, HCK, Bengaluru - 560001)

¶2Sri. Ravikumar, S/o. Somannachari, Aged about 39 years

¶3Smt. Ningarajamma, W/o. Somannachari, aged about 60 years

by VEERENDRA KUMAR K M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶4Sri Raghu, S/o. Somannachari, Aged about 30 years

¶5Kum. Bharati, D/o. Mahesh, Aged about 29 years

¶6Sri. Somannachari, S/o. Late Sannachari, Aged about 68 years

¶7Smt. Chinnamma, W/o. Late Chinnaswamychari, Aged about 48 years

¶8Sri. Brahmalinga, S/o. Late Chinnaswamychari, Aged about 31 years

All are R/at Ayarahalli Village, Varuna Hobli, Mysuru Taluk And District - 570 010. …Respondents (By Sri Vijaya Kumar Majage, SPP-II for R1)

This Crl.A is filed u/s 372 Cr.P.C. (filed u/s 413) BNSS) praying to peruse the same and set aside the judgment and order of acquittal dated 10.12.2024 passed in S.C.No.274/2022 on the file of the Hon'ble VII Additional District and Sessions Judge at Mysuru and convict and sentence respondent No.2 for offence under sections 376(2)(n) and 417 of IPC and convict and sentence respondent No.3 to 8 for offence under section 506 r/w 34 of IPC in accordance with law by allowing this appeal.

This appeal, coming on for admission, this day, judgment was delivered therein as under:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR and HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR)

Heard Sri. Tejas N., learned counsel for the appellant. Learned SPP-II takes notice for respondent no.1.

¶2This appeal is preferred by the defacto complainant aggrieved by the judgment dated 10.12.2024 passed by the VII Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Mysuru acquitting all the accused for the offences under sections 376(2)(n), 417, 506 r/w section 34 of IPC.

¶3The allegations are that accused no.1 had physical relationship with the appellant on the promise of marrying her and ultimately refused to marry. This resulted in FIR being registered and all the accused being charge sheeted. Actually accused no.1 is the main accused and the other accused are arrayed on the allegation that they all threatened the defacto complainant.

¶4The prosecution examined 16 witnesses to establish its case. The trial court found that the relationship between the appellant and the accused no.1 existed for more than five years and they had consensual sex. The age of the appellant on the date of registration of the FIR was 32 years. It appears that a panchayat was held to convince accused no.1 to marry the appellant, but he refused and this resulted in registration of FIR and prosecution of the accused.

¶5On perusal of the judgment, we find that the trial court has assessed the evidence properly and gave cogent reasons for recording acquittal. Therefore we do not find a good reason to admit this appeal. Appeal is dismissed.

Sd/- (SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR) JUDGE

Sd/- (K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE SD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11