High Court Karnataka High Court

The State Of Karnataka vs Venkatesh @ Chaluvegowda on 29 January, 2009

Karnataka High Court
The State Of Karnataka vs Venkatesh @ Chaluvegowda on 29 January, 2009
Author: S.R.Bannurmath & Gowda
 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BAIPVGALDEPEA  

DATED THIS THE 29*" DAY Q,7.'7..JA'NU1'5'VR'YV',"'.::PL'«Z
P R E S E  j x -A  2 

THE HON'BLE MR.JusTIc:E_s.R}'-DANNUENATH 
THE HON'BLE MR. JusTIcE&A;jNTVENDGEDPAIAGéwDA

CRIMINAL APPEAL 7VEu16{2v£.1:Og. gw
CRIMINAL Appgggfiaflgggzggg

 

THE STATE QF"Kfi'Rf§ATAKTA4"  "
I P'  5 >1 '  A  APPELLANT

(BY 5R1. 5.3; PA\.'IIN',7SPP)I ":5. 

AND :

 " 'VENKATEEH. @- CHALLJAVEEGLZJWDA
r_AGE:2_I2 YEARS. 

'R/Ow LAi(S H--HIPunA VILLAGE
Hvso-NE TALUK.  
t    ...RESPONDENT

{av SRI. ESDHASUNDARA AND G P SURESHA, ADVS.,)

” THIS ‘CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378(1)

4″‘&é'(~3V)”»Cr;P.C PRAYING T0 GRANT LEAVE TO FILE AN APPEAL
I …_AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT DATED 2.1.2002 PAssED BY THE I
PADDL. 5.3., MYSORE, IN S.C.N0. 7/96 ACQUITTING THE
‘”REsPoNDENT-AcctJsED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE

UNDER SECTION 376 R/W SECTION 511 IPC.

009

in case of sexual assault, the court should

corroboration to the evidence of victim. If’evieie:nce of –.,

the victim of such heinous crirfle ieeafccepteble’*rhy:_Wt!ie:’

court, that would be sofficienri: for giiiing e cornriiction. jjitdie

stated therein, thus:-

“(C) Corroboration;:.4’iii«. ne.tVei_ne”‘e%ua nonflfor a
conviction in a rape’casell’fin’ setting,
refusal te actjon._the”te*stir§:;o:n3€jof a7 v~icti’m of sexual
assault in €ol;'”.co.’rroberet’ion as a rule, is
adding i}1so–ifit”toviifier$i;’:’.’iv’i_i?l{iiy-*sh’ould the evidence of
tnefgirl ‘~o;r];the:7§worr;eVn- wh’o””eo4moiains of rape or
sexi.s_al’– viewed with the aid of
spectacles ritted’v.rw_itn–Jleinses tinged with doubt,
diebelieféigémri sue’oicion’?: To do so is to gustify the

..clier_ge of rne’iev–…ch’euvinis:ri in a male eominated

V or a woman in the tradition bound
‘hon’-éoeirnissive society of India wouid be

.. __ext’rernely reluctant even to admit that any
it ‘._»_i:r:cident which is likely to reflect on her chastity

had ever occurred. She would be conscious of the
danger of being ostracized by the society or being
looked down by the society including by her own
farniiy members, relativles, friends, and

5/’

15

!A%%y£3: V
18.2.2869 cri.,é.,?:6i.2Ga;2′-c;/c.;~ .’ i ~

(mt,/-1 -2,22;/2;a>–«E.@;.,___ ~

mam Q94 mac. gag. §’*éQe§43,!2QQ’.?_

“§”%’:§3 aageaé wag fieagé am }:§~,%”2.’%’2§§é:§g_mé;€% §a-té§v ~
29,,1.29@§, aha &§§:aa3 ffiad is’; tééa a%§£a;’é%§’~.g’gg;;z$t’ _%%i:é17f

gasggraayzt £3? ca::22;§£’i§e:: was “s:§:%:s’:’*.z;1§ss%e;::’–,-._’ fie
aggeai §§§$z§ :3: Sim $t§%€€ was—-%f%’§vewed E5 ‘Y;:a¢,.a§:2d mg
agsvigiim of mg aaaagséd- $%;’a_s :.3¥t€§¥”?;锑f%f$.§F’§*§~S~%£€§G%’§ 354 EPC
is Seztécn 3:25 ya :-;w’V’Vs{e;t;§’_;£ :»51’l, ‘1€:i?_£;_ i.:’eta§nE:’§g the
sarztence sf §r:§pr’§:s;5_§2ma:-Jggt 1&5! ‘§§:i’é’;.j_~~.V§£’ei;§e:ver, E2 25 ta be
rgeteé iéwat §.t’£’2’%3»:g3g5:§§§i..’;’f%3’a ffréa_! -€:;f:;:”t %§és sentenaad the
accased ta %:§§e%§_§ 3%’ 3?339’=v*’€F’5e??€@
am 3;!§;;’%é§Vé?%éE’§f::_ka,.V§:éé: ;>::a5g.;a;I :4 :§Vf”€E?:e judgmeréi, it is irygaé
‘ ‘ ‘ V 4′ V”§’;=.’~.}_.’a: £:§.,,rgeg§’a§%z:ca§ arm? arm Byvpfl

as 18 §?$a§’3.’ S:§%§:;’g
%;’:a§:«es*t.ar2Tce:-:~;{ %%*::%}e”‘::_aé’:’:.e’%§’_;§§:’a::teé is $3 csyrecteé a3 38

rz2sa§2t§§s’v§:3s€aa:§§’-»r:;f; 2% yéarg am ts éssasa fregh €$§’y’.

Sd/-.2
Judge

Sd/-3
Tudge