Bangalore District Court
Unknown vs Mallikarjuna @ Malla on 10 October, 2019
IN THE COURT OF THE LIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS SPECIAL JUDGE,
BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019
-: PRESENT :-
S.H.PUSHPANJALI DEVI, B.A. LL.B.,
LIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Special Judge,
Bengaluru.
SPECIAL C.C.No. 132/2014
COMPLAINANT :
The State of Karnataka
By Thilak Nagar Police Station,
Bengaluru.
[Rep. by Public Prosecutor]
/ VERSUS /
ACCUSED:
Mallikarjuna @ Malla,
S/o. Devendrappa,
Aged about 19 years,
R/at. No. 75, Gulbarga Colony,
Thilak Nagar, Bengaluru City.
( In Judicial custody)
[Rep. by Standing Counsel Mr.
VVS - Advocate]
2
Spl.C C.132/2014
TABULATION OF EVENTS
1. Date of Commission : 28/12/2013
Of Offence
2. Date of Report :
Of Offence 28/12/2013
3. Date of arrest of Accused : 28/12/2013
4. Date of release on Bail Accused is in judicial custody
Accused :
5 Period undergone in 5 years 11 months and 7 days
Judicial Custody :
6 Name of the complainant : Smt. Venkateshamma
7. Date of Commencement :
of recording evidence 05/12/2015
8. Date of Closing of : 05/09/2019
Evidence
9. Charges framed : Sections 366A, 376 IPC and
Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO
Act, 2012.
10. Opinion of the Judge : As per final Order
(S.H.PUSHPANJALI DEVI)
LIII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Special Judge,
Bangalore.
3
Spl.C C.132/2014
JUDGMENT
This Charge Sheet is filed by the Police Inspector of Thilaknagar Police Station, Bengaluru City against the Accused for the offences punishable u/Secs. 366A, 376, 506 of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.
2. The brief facts of the case of the Prosecution are that on 28/12/2013, during the afternoon at about 2 pm, when the minor Victim CW-2 was bringing MTR Sambar powder from the shop, the Accused forcibly kidnapped her by closing her mouth and took her to a shed at vacant place situated by the side of the house No. 34 at Jayanagara 3rd block, East RBI Extension, Ist Main road, 2nd cross and committed rape on her. He has also caused Penetrative Sexual Assault on her and alleged to be committed the offences punishable under 4 Spl.C C.132/2014 Secs. 366A ,376 and 506 IPC and Secs. 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act 2012.
3. The complainant is the mother of the victim, aged about 8 years, gave complaint on the same day 28/12/2013 by disclosing that when she had been to her work, the victim along with her grand mother Rangamma were at home. When she returned from her work at about 3 pm, she was made known from one Shashikala and others about the bleeding caused to her minor daughter, taken to hospital, after she went to Indira Ghandi Institute of Child Health Hospital, Doctor discloses her about severe injury caused to the private part of the minor Victim. The Doctor has further discloses about the Statement given by minor Victim that the Accused forcibly took her to the vacant space by closing her mouth and committed rape on her as well as threatened not to disclose the same to others. 5
Spl.C C.132/2014 Thereafter, she gave complaint against the Accused and case registered in Crime No. 440/2013 for the offences punishable under Secs. 366A, 376 an 506 IPC and Secs 4 and 6 of POCSO Act 2012. Accused was arrested by the police on the same day and produced before Court and remanded to judicial custody. Subsequently he was represented though Standing Counsel appointed by this Court.
4. Afterwards the I.O. has conducted investigation and collected the material documents and filed charge sheet against the Accused for the offences punishable under Secs. 366A, 376, 506 IPC and Secs. 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012.
5. After serving the copies to the Accused, this Court has heard both the learned Public prosecutor for the State and the learned standing Counsel for the accused 6 Spl.C C.132/2014 on framing of charge. This Court has found primafacie materials to proceed against the Accused and charges framed under Secs. 366A, 376 IPC and Sections. 4 R/w. 6 of POCSO Act, the same is read over and explained to the Accused and he has not pleaded guilty.
6. The prosecution examined 10 witnesses out of 23 witnesses as PWs 1 to 10. The documents marked as Ex.P-1 to 10, 2(a)(b)(c), 3(a),4(a),5(a), 7(a) & 8(a). The Material Objects marked as MO's 1 to 3. CW's 5,6,9,10,12,14 and 22 remained absent, after issuance of NBW and Proclamation against them. Therefore, their evidence has been taken closed by rejecting the prayer on behalf of the prosecution to re-issue the same.
7. The incriminating circumstances in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses read over and explained to 7 Spl.C C.132/2014 the accused. He has not denied the evidence and not chosen to lead any defence evidence on his behalf.
8. Heard, the arguments of learned Public Prosecutor for the State and the learned Standing Counsel for the Accused, on merits.
9. The points that arise for my consideration are :
1. Whether the Prosecution has proved that the Accused on 28/12/2013 forcibly kidnapped the minor victim and taken her to a Shed at vacant space situated at Jayanagar 3rd block and committed rape on her and thereby committed the offence punishable under Secs. 366A and 376 IPC?
2. Whether the Prosecution has proved that the Accused has committed Penetrative Sexual Assault on the Victim after kidnapping her on 28/12/2013 punishable under Sec. 4 R/w. Sec. 6 of POCSO Act ?
3. What Order?
10. My findings on the above points are as under:-
Point No.1 : In the Affirmative
8
Spl.C C.132/2014
Point No.2 : In the Affirmative
Point No.3 : As per final order
for the following
REASONS
11. Point Nos.1 and 2: These points are taken
together for common discussion for the sake of convenience, to avoid repetition.
12. The case of the prosecution alleged against the Accused that he has kidnapped the minor Victim aged about 8 years, the daughter of complainant and committed rape on her and also Penetrative Sexual Assault in the shed situated near Jayanagar 3 rd block. The mother of the Victim Venkateshamma examined as PW-1 and she has deposed about the Accused was residing in front of her residential house and her daughter Victim was studied up to 4 th standard. She has stated that the alleged kidnap of her minor daughter taken when she was away for her Coolie work and while 9 Spl.C C.132/2014 returning at 3 pm made known about severe bleeding injury caused to her minor daughter who was taken to Hospital and taking treatment. Afterwards she had been to Hospital and saw that minor Victim was unconscious. After she regain consciousness, when she was enquired with her, made known that the Accused took her to old house near the Tank and committed rape on her. Further she has stated on that day her mother gave Rs. 100/- to the Victim to being MTR Sambar powder. Therefore she had been to shop and while bringing the Sambar powder the incident of rape had been taken place. Therefore, she gave complaint against the Accused marked as Ex.P-1.
13. In the cross-examination she has admitted about her mother made known that injury sustained by the minor Victim by falling on the ground. She has similarly deposed the consciousness regained by the minor victim in the Hospital at about 4 pm and the rape 10 Spl.C C.132/2014 committed on her as disclosed by the Doctor. Afterwards, she gave complaint to the police. In her further cross-examination she has denied the previous grudge with husband of her sister and Accused. She has also denied in spite of no incident of kidnap and rape taken on her minor daughter, a false complaint has been given against the Accused.
14. The minor Victim is examined as PW-2, as she was aged about 9 years, some questions were put to her by this Court to makeout her capacity to understand and depose in the witness box. However as she had given suitable answers, permitted the learned Public prosecutor to examine her. In the Chief examination she has stated that her grand mother gave Rs.100/- to bring Masala powder on 28/12/2013. After taking Masala powder while she was returning to her house, the accused closed her mouth and taken towards vacant space and a old house, where nobody were residing. 11
Spl.C C.132/2014 She has explained how the rape committed on her by the Accused after removing his underwear and her underwear, committed Penetrative Sexual assault by putting his private part in to the private part of the victim. Afterwards she has shown the injury on her private part to her sister Shashikala, who along with her grand mother took the Victim to the Hospital. She has identified the Accused in the open court who was behind the screen when shown in the open court.
15. She has further stated about the spot where the Accused has committed rape on her has been shown to the police and they have conducted mahazar as per Ex.P-2, she has identified her signature marked as Ex. P-2(a). She has further affirmed about the incident had been disclosed with the Doctor in the hospital and colour of the dress worn by her at the time of incident. Her cloths were shown in open court after opening the 12 Spl.C C.132/2014 sealed covers, same were identified and marked as MO's 1 to 3.
16. In the cross-examination she has stated the name of her School where she studied up to 5th standard in Kannada Medium. She has further clarified the fees to be paid to private school and fees to be paid once in a year to the Government School. She has also stated the timings of the school and Dasara vacation given in the month of October and Christmus Festival holidays will be given in the month of December. She has explained about as on the date of incident her grand mother gave Rs. 100/- to bring Masala powder, she has denied for the suggestion put that her grand mother did not give any amount to bring Masala powder and balance of Rs. 90/- was not given by the Shop owner. She has stated the walkable distance of 10 minutes to the said shop, where the huge gathering of public, many houses and shops were situated. The suggestion put to 13 Spl.C C.132/2014 her that Accused never took her to the same road forcibly. She has stated how the Accused has committed rape by putting his private part to her private part. She has explained how she know about that private part as it was shown by her grand mother. She was also suggested about the alleged quarrel took between the Accused and one Vijay, which was denied by her. She also denied that false evidence deposed on the instigation of the said Vijay. She has also clearly affirmed about the dress of Silk red border and yellow colour of underwear worn by her. She has again and again affirmed that she was wearing the same dress shown to her before the Court marked as MO's No.1 to 3. Further cross-examination also establish the rape committed by the Accused as the victim has clearly explained how the rape committed by the Accused by removing his underwear. She has also categorically 14 Spl.C C.132/2014 stated the thereat caused by Accused to take away her life if she discloses the incident with others.
17. She being aged about 9 years not aware of the contents of mahazar conducted at the spot shown by her. But she has stated that she herself shown the spot of occurrence to the police where they have conducted mahazar under Ex.P-2.
18. The grand mother of the Victim Rangamma is examined as PW-3. She has clearly stated that as on the date of incident she gave Rs.100/- to the minor Victim and asked her to bring Sambar powder, afterwards she did not come. Therefore, she along with neighbour Shashikala went in search of her. At that time, she saw the Victim was lying in the dilapidated house near Tank. After she shouted loudly, the Victim came outside and saw that bleeding from her private part. Therefore, she asked with her and the Victim made known about the 15 Spl.C C.132/2014 rape committed by the Accused, afterwards threatened her life not to disclose the incident with anybody. Subsequently, the Victim was taken to Indira Gandhi Children hospital and treated by Doctor. She has clearly stated when she saw the Victim found Sambar powder and Rs. 90/- in her hand.
19. In the cross-examination she has admitted that one Shashikala and Vijay were residing in her house and they are natives of Gulbarga and the Accused is also native of Gulbarga and all of them were residing at Gulbarga colony. She has denied the alleged incident of quarrel took between Accused and Vijay, in the quarrel Accused beaten the said Vijay. She has not able to say the distance of shop from where the victim brought Sambar powder. She has admitted location of many shops , houses by the side of the road while going to the said shop. She has clearly stated that dilapidated house situated after 5-6 houses near the Tank. She has 16 Spl.C C.132/2014 affirmed about the incident occurred when she sent the Victim to bring Sambar powder by giving Rs. 100/-. She has denied for the suggestion that she did not see that Victim was lying in the old house and no bleeding from her private part.
20. The witness Shashikala is examined as PW-4 and deposed about the relationship of PW-1 and 3 as mother of victim and grand mother of Victim. She has also stated about the grand mother of the victim PW-3 has given Rs. 100/- to the Victim to bring Sambar Powder, but she did not return to home. Therefore, she along with PW-3 went in search of Victim and found her in the old house near Tank and bleeding in her private part. Therefore, when she has questioned her she told she has fell on the ground. Afterwards she has taken to Indiraghandi Institute of Child Heath hospital and before the Doctor the Victim has disclosed about the rape committed by the Accused on her in the old house. 17
Spl.C C.132/2014 In the cross-examination she has affirmed about the injury of bleeding to the Victim induced by her when they went in search of Victim. She has also stated when the Victim discloses the incident with the Doctor, she along with PW-3 were present. She has denied the suggestion that no such incident had been taken place and Victim was not sent to bring Sambar powder by giving Rs. 100/- to her and she did not sustain any injury.
21. The evidence of Pws-1 to 3 being related to each other as mother of the Victim and grand mother of the Victim supported the prosecution with regard to kidnapping of Victim by the Accused and rape committed on her. In corroboration to their evidence, the Medical evidence produced through Doctor S.Ramesh as PW-5, who has supported the case of prosecution. He has clearly stated about examination of the Victim on 28/12/2013 when she got bleeding in 18 Spl.C C.132/2014 her private part. She was treated in the Indira Ghandi Institute of Child Health Hospital, thereafter referred to Gynecologist. However the earlier treatment was given to the Victim in the Indira Ghandi Institute of Child Health Hospital and she was examined on 30/12/2013 in the Operation Theater. After examination of her genital, he found the Grade-I Perineal injury, which was sutured under GA on 30/12/2013. She was admitted in the hospital and discharged on 17/1/2014. The report given by him marked as Ex.P-3 and signature is Ex.P-3(a). He has given his opinion of Penetrative Sexual Assault committed on the Victim. Therefore, the evidence of the Doctor clearly establish that the Rape and Penetrative Sexual assault committed on the Victim, which was made out after her examination by the Doctor.
22. It is true that PW-5 has admitted that Cw-15 Keshavamurthy was the incharge of Indira Ghandi 19 Spl.C C.132/2014 Institute of Child Health Hospital has referred the Victim to admit as inpatient on 28/12/2013. After recording her Statement, he has given intimation to the police. PW-5 has identified the signature of CW-15 in the said document marked as Ex.P-4 and his signature marked as Ex. P-4(a). However he has clarified that since CW-15 went to Chandigarh for his further studies, he was not available for the period of 2 years, to give evidence. Therefore, the Certificate given by CW-15 has been marked through this witness as Ex.P-5. In the said document it is very clearly stated that the cloths of Victim along with Vaginal Swab and other Articles obtained during her examination are seized and forwarded to Police Inspector for Chemical Examination.
23. However in the cross-examination he has denied for the suggestion that Ex.P-3 the Medical Certificate has been fabricated without giving any treatment to the 20 Spl.C C.132/2014 Victim in the Hospital from 28/12/2013 to 17/1/2014. He has also stated about information regarding the incident as it was explained in Ex.P-4.
24. The prosecution has examined Dr.Keshavamurthy as PW-9, in corroboration with the evidence of PW-5. He has deposed that the victim was brought to IGICH Hospital on 28/12/2013 by her Grand mother on the history of Sexual assault. After examining the Victim he has noticed blood Stains in between two thighs. At that time the Victim was scared and not able to speak, he saw bleeding from her private part. He has examined her and collected her cloths , thereafter sent for Chemical Examination. He has clearly stated about colour of her cloths worn by her, on the date of examination, the same has been identified as MO's 1 to 3. In the cross-examination he has denied that not examined the Victim and no Medical Certificate issued in proof of her examination. 21
Spl.C C.132/2014
25. The prosecution has placed the the evidence of Victim, her mother and Grand mother and independent witness along with Medical evidence deposed by PW-5 who has clearly stated about the Penetrative Sexual Assault madeout from the injuries sustained by the Victim on her private part as noted in Ex.P-3. Their evidence is corroborating with each other.
26. The prosecution to prove the Spot mahazar examined the independent witness Anand as PW-7, He has identified his signature in the mahazar Ex.P-2 marked as Ex.P-2(a). He has affirmed the police conducted Mahazar on the spot shown by the Victim, where the rape has been committed by the Accused. Therefore, it is very clear that the spot mahazar has been conducted by the police which is corroborated by the evidence of both the Minor Victim and this independent witness.
22
Spl.C C.132/2014
27. The prosecution has examined Police witnesses to prove the offences committed by the Accused against the Victim. PW-6 Renuka, the woman Police Constable has deposed about the Articles of the Victim collected by the Doctor during her examination were brought from the Hospital and produced before the I.O. under the report Ex. P-5. She has identified her signature as Ex.P-5(a).
28. One of the Police Constable who was deputed in search of the Accused, Rajesh D. Kesthi is examined as PW-8. He has deposed that on 28/12/2013 he along with CW-22 had been to Gulbarga Colony after getting information and traced out the Accused. They enquired his name and address, confirming that he is the Accused brought him to the Police Station and produced before the Inspector with a Report given by CW-22. He has denied for the suggestion that not made any entry in the Station Dairy about he deputed work in search of 23 Spl.C C.132/2014 Accused. But he has stated the concerned Officer has made entry in the said Register.
29. The Police Inspector who has conducted investigation Mohd. Sajjad Khan is examined as PW-10. He has received the case file from PSI on 29/12/2013, and conducted further investigation. The Accused was sent to Victoria hospital for Medical examination thereafter received Articles obtained by the Doctor. He has also recorded the Voluntary Statement of Accused and conducted Mahazar at the spot shown by him as per Ex.P-7, his signature is marked as Ex.P-7(a). Afterwards he has recorded the Statements of Cws 3,4,9 and 10. Further he has sent WPC to Indira Ghandi Institute of Child Heath, where Victim was admitted and treated to collect her cloths and articles. He has received 10 Articles collected by the Doctor as per Ex. P-8 and his signature marked as Ex.P-8(a). 24
Spl.C C.132/2014
30. Afterwards he has conducted mahazar at the spot shown by Mother of the Victim as per Ex.P-2, his signature identified as Ex.P.2.(c). He has also obtained Medical Certificate of Victim under Ex.P-3 and his signature is marked as Ex.P-3.(b). He has identified the true copy of the Medical Certificates of both Victim and Accused marked as Ex.P9 and 10. After completing the investigation, he has filed charge-sheet against the Accused.
31. In the cross-examination he has denied that not conducted any mahazar at the spot and obtained the signatures of witnesses, who were not present at the time of spot Mahazar. He has also denied the Victim was not subjected to Medical examination and no Articles belonging to her sent by the Doctor and the same not sent for Chemical examination to get FSL Report.
25
Spl.C C.132/2014
32. It is made out from the Study Certificate of Victim marked with consent as Ex.P-6 shows her Date of Birth is 14/9/2005. Therefore, as per the said document the age of the Victim as on 28/12/2013 was 8 years, on whom the Rape and Penetrative Sexual Assault committed by the Accused. The evidence of Victim is corroborated with the Medical evidence of Pws 5 and 9 with supporting and reliable documents. The evidence of Mother and Grand mother of Victim also supported with regard to the condition of Victim noticed by them soon after the incident, immediately she was taken to Indira Ghandi Institute of Child Health Hospital for treatment , where she was examined by the Doctor and madeout the injury found on the private part of the Victim Opined as Perineal Injury, which is committed by way of Sexual Assault called as Penetrative Sexual Assault. The Medical evidence is supported by the documents Exs.P-3, 8 and 9. 26
Spl.C C.132/2014
33. The prosecution has also placed reliable evidence in proof of spot mahazar conducted at the Spot as per Ex.P-2 by examining PW-7. He has clearly stated about Spot shown by the Victim where she was Raped by the Accused and police drawing mahazar at the same spot.
34. After Considering the oral and documentary evidence of the prosecution witnesses as corroborated with each other, no doubtful circumstances to disbelieve the evidence of Victim and Doctors. Hence, I come to conclusion that the prosecution has proved that on 28/12/2013 the Accused has kidnapped the Minor Victim aged about 8 years forcibly and after taking her into a old Shed by the side of house No.34, Jayanagar 3rd Block, Ist Main Road, committed Rape and Penetrative Sexual Assault punishable under Sections. 366A , 376 IPC and Sections. 4 r/w. 6 of POCSO 27 Spl.C C.132/2014 Act, 2012. Hence I answer Points No.1 and 2 in Affirmative.
35. Point No.3: In view of my above discussion, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Acting under Section 235(2) of Cr.P.C. Accused Mallikarjuna @ Malli, is hereby convicted for offences punishable under Sections 366A, and 376 of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.
To hear regarding Sentence.
(Dictated to the Judgement writer, transcript and computerized by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open Court today on 5th day of October, 2019.) (S.H.PUSHPANJALI DEVI) LIII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Special Judge, Bangalore.28
Spl.C C.132/2014 Dated: 10.10.2019 ORDER ON SENTENCE Heard, the arguments of the learned Public Prosecutor, the Standing Counsel appeared for the Accused and Accused in person on passing of sentence.
2. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that the Accused has committed the heinous offence of Rape against the minor child aged about 8 years.
Therefore, prays for maximum Sentence against the Accused.
3. The Learned Standing Counsel for Accused has submitted that he has no Criminal antecedents and no other cases are pending against him. Therefore, prayed to take lenient view and pass minimum Sentence.
4. The Accused himself has submitted that he has not committed any offence and prayed to take lenient view to award minimum Sentence.
29
Spl.C C.132/2014
5. This Court has already come to conclusion that the Accused has committed the offences u/Secs. 366A, 376 IPC and Sections 4 r/w 6 of POCSO Act, 2012. Therefore, cannot pass lesser Sentence for the said offences, as committed against child aged about 8 years. The inhuman and brutal act of the Accused against the said child, who was forcibly taken to a old shed, raped her and made to suffer lot, which cannot be equated in terms of money or any other valuables. Now a days it has become common that this type of devilish acts of Rape and Sexual Assault repeatedly happening in the Society, particularly, on the children.
6. I do not find any valid reasons or bonafide grounds to take lenient view to pass the lessor Sentence. Because, the Accused cannot be shown any mercy as he has committed heinous offence of Rape and Penetrative Sexual Assault on the child aged 8 years.
30
Spl.C C.132/2014
7. The offence u/S 366A of IPC is punishable with Rigorous Imprisonment may extend to Ten years and also be liable to fine.
8. The offence u/S 376 of IPC is punishable shall not be less than Seven years, but which may extend to Imprisonment for life and shall also be liable to fine.
9. The offence u/Sec. 4 of POCSO Act, 2012 shall be punished with Imprisonment shall not be less than Seven years, but may extend to Imprisonment for Life and shall also be liable to fine.
10. The offence u/Sec. 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 shall be punished with Rigorous Imprisonment for a term shall not be less than Ten years, but may extend to Imprisonment for life and shall also be liable to fine.
11. Therefore, considering all the above discussed facts and also the serious nature of all the offences committed against the Child of 8 years, if the 31 Spl.C C.132/2014 Accused is sentenced with maximum punishment of Rigorous Life Imprisonment, it will be appropriate and certainly meet the ends of justice. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The Accused -Mallikarjuna @ Malli is sentenced to shall undergo Rigorous Imprisonment of Ten years and shall pay fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence under Section 366A of IPC. In default, he shall further undergo Simple Imprisonment for Two years.
The Accused shall undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for Life and pay fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence under Section 376 of IPC, In default, he shall further undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for Three years.
The Accused shall undergo Imprisonment for Seven years and pay fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence under 32 Spl.C C.132/2014 Section 4 of POCSO Act, 2012. In default, he shall further undergo, imprisonment of Three years.
The Accused shall undergo Imprisonment for Ten years and pay fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence under Section 6 of POCSO Act, 2012. In default, he shall further undergo, imprisonment of Three years.
All the Sentences shall run concurrently. The Bail bonds executed earlier by the Accused and surety shall stands cancelled.
The total fine amount shall be paid to the Victim, after due identification.
The Victim is further entitle for compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- as provided under Rule 7 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Rules 2012.
Mos 1 to 3 are ordered to be destroyed as worthless after Appeal period is over.33
Spl.C C.132/2014 Send a copy of this Judgment to the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, Bengaluru for Compensation to be paid by the State Government from the Victims Compensation Fund.
Supply free copy of this Judgment to the Accused immediately.
(Dictated to the Judgement writer, transcript and computerized by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open Court today on 10 th day of October, 2019.) (S.H.PUSHPANJALI DEVI) LIII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Special Judge, Bangalore.
ANNEXURE
1) List of witnesses examined for the Prosecution PW.1 Venkateshamma PW.2 Victim PW.3 Rangamma PW.4 Shashikala PW.5 Dr.S.Ramesh 34 Spl.C C.132/2014 PW.6 Renuka PW.7 Anand PW.8 Rajesh D Kesthi PW.9 Dr.Keshava Murthy PW.10 Mohd. Sajjad Khan
2) List of documents marked for the Prosecution Ex.P1 Complaint Ex.P2 Panchanama Ex.P2(a) Signature of PW-2 Ex.P2(b) Signature of PW-1 Ex.P2(c) Signature of Magistrate Ex.P3 Medical Report of Victim.
Ex.P3(a) Signature of PW-5
Ex.P4 Letter to Siddapura P.S.
Ex.P.4(a) Signature of Magistrate
Ex.P5 Report
Ex.P5(a) Signature of PW-6
Ex.P6 Age Confirmation Certificate
Ex.P7 Panchanama
Ex.P7(a) Signature of PW-
Ex.P8 OPT Card
Ex.P.8(a) Signature of
Ex.P-9 Medical certificate of Victim
35
Spl.C C.132/2014
Ex.P.10 Medical certificate of Accused.
3) List of Material Objects marked for the Prosecution
MO.1. Yellow Knicker
MO2 Green Skirt
MO3 Green Top
4) List of witnesses examined for the Accused
Nil
5) List of documents marked for the Accused
Nil
6) List of Material Objects marked for the Accused
Nil
(S.H.PUSHPANJALI DEVI)
LIII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Special Judge, Bangalore.36
Spl.C C.132/2014 Accused produced from judicial custody Judgment pronounced in the open court, (vide separate Judgment ) ORDER Acting under Section 235(2) of Cr.P.C. Accused Mallikarjuna @ Malli, is hereby convicted for offences punishable under Sections 366A, and 376 of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.
To hear regarding Sentence.
(S.H.PUSHPANJALI DEVI) LIII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Special Judge, Bangalore.
37
Spl.C C.132/2014 Accused is produced from judicial custody . Sentence pronounced in the open court, (vide separate Order ) ORDER The Accused -Mallikarjuna @ Malli is sentenced to shall undergo Rigorous Imprisonment of Ten years and shall pay fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence under Section 366A of IPC. In default, he shall further undergo Simple Imprisonment for Two years.
The Accused shall undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for Life and pay fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence under Section 376 of IPC, In default, he shall further undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for Three years.
The Accused shall undergo Imprisonment for Seven years and pay fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence under 38 Spl.C C.132/2014 Section 4 of POCSO Act, 2012. In default, he shall further undergo, imprisonment of Three years.
The Accused shall undergo Imprisonment for Ten years and pay fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence under Section 6 of POCSO Act, 2012. In default, he shall further undergo, imprisonment of Three years.
All the Sentences shall run concurrently. The Bail bonds executed earlier by the Accused and surety shall stands cancelled.
The total fine amount shall be paid to the Victim, after due identification.
The Victim is further entitle for compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- as provided under Rule 7 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Rules 2012.
Mos 1 to 3 are ordered to be destroyed as worthless after Appeal period is over.
39
Spl.C C.132/2014 Send a copy of this Judgment to the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, Bengaluru for Compensation to be paid by the State Government from the Victims Compensation Fund.
Supply free copy of this Judgment to the Accused immediately.
(S.H.PUSHPANJALI DEVI) LIII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Special Judge, Bangalore.
40 Spl.C C.132/2014