State Of Karnataka By Jayapura Police vs B C Ramakrishna on 7 July, 2010

[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

State Of Karnataka By Jayapura Police vs B C Ramakrishna on 7 July, 2010

Bench: K.Sreedhar Rao

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
Dated this the 7"' day of July, 2010 

PRESENT

THE HONBLE MR. JUsTIcE.,K»vsREEb'HA:é  dd'

AND

THE HONBLE MR. JUsffIc_E ARALL  
Criminal Appeal  
BETWEEN '  ' " ' 

State of Karnataka by   'V _  v_ A '
Jayapura         ...Appe1lar1t

[By Sri H -.._Sl7-'¥3')  A 
AND: 'V  V'   1

B C Ramalgris-}1'na,"V~."-._'*  
S / 0.1ate Chi'kka.che]Liv':ajiah',~~   " e 
26 years, Harijari, _Eri:pIoyee 
Vikrant Faetorydéen daily wages,
Native Of}¢Batmikuppey v(H}I'a1}:1E1,

='fBi'1ivkereve----Hob}.i, Hunsur Taluk,

Z V Mysore.-,

At present .1f/'a.H(:i'use N().-4:63,
D S2.;bi;aiah:"Road'; . V V 
Chamraja. M oh.'a-11,}

 . Respondent

" xgay'-s;~1yMaha£1tesh s Hosmath, Adv.) ._ i Cr1.A is filed under Section 378(1) and [3] of '_j.,_t_he' C':;imi1i1a1 Procedure Code, praying t.o set aside the i gizdgment. and order of acquittal passed by the learned 2;

ix) Prl. Sessions Judge in S C No.256/2002 dated 9.52003 acqnitting the respondent -- accused for the Vofferices punishable under Sections 376, 417 and 506 of'IPC.f._ This Crl.A coming on for hearing':_:"t1'1:is:

SREED}-{AR RAD J passed the following: _- ~ -. b JUooM.sN',;'~ 3 The material facts of' 'the pimsccutionﬁ'd.i,sc1osesuS' that one Jayalakshrni ~ the VAEPWI on 17.10.2001 lodged police stating that the acciised her had intercourse.axlith:'::lfie_t seven months pregnan.t_,_ her and he denied the sexual' PW1 in the Panchayat before thes.._4el:iei*s_. PWI lodged a complaint against' hirn. v.l'I"'l:e,V__;ngevdical evidence discloses that PW1 w;as__7 ..mo-nth's.__pregnant as on the date of complaint.

discharged for committing the offences '.Vu/Ss...1;3'Z;'t3h_ 417 and 506 of IPC. The Trial Court '0 ''..jljacCl1n1tted the accused. Hence, the State is in appeal. 1 J

2. PWs.2 and :3 are the parents of PW}. They came to know about her pregnancy and she reveals that the accused had sexual intercourse with her continuously for about one yr--ear under pretext of n1a1*riage--..'4 evidence further discloses that the matter..was.reAferredV'"

to the elders for negotiation. 'I'}'i,e sexual relationship with PW1'. -f_l'he in(_Ci'dent,a,ouf pretext of marrlazge is based of on record. PW1 in the i:as"'stated that the accused under the pretext of ~,rna"rriag.e had sexual intercourse' 1'1§§r§ hasdﬂstated in her evidence that the first act oi' seXuaI"'in»:ei'course was done Without her consentddddanidrby when she was sobbing, the . .''accuvsed1.'iate3:Aprornisded to marry her. The subsequent is adrnittediy with the consent of Thef prcrosecfution sought for conviction of the .'accu_s:t:;»d for committing the offence of sexual intercourse

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court