Dismissed¶55

State by Rural Police v. Sri.Chandan

Karnataka HC31 Oct 2025CRL.A/1798/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

HC-KAR, CRL.A No. 1798 of 2019, decided 31.10.2025 by G Basavaraja J: State appeal u/s 378(1) and (3) Cr.P.C. against acquittal u/s 417 IPC (cheating by promise of marriage); PW1 testimony showed willing/consensual participation over ~3 years; acquittal in Crl.A.No.130/2017 upheld; appeal dismissed as devoid of merits; related precedents noted: D.S.Karthik (2017) 2 KCCR 1047, Uday AIR 2003 SC 1639, Zindar Ali Sheikh (2009) 3 SCC 761.

What did the court decide?

On close perusal of the testimony of PW1, the victim willingly participated in sexual intercourse with the accused on several occasions over a period of about three years. ¶52

State by Rural Police Vs Sri.Chandan — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶55

Issue for consideration

Whether the judgment of acquittal dated 06.04.2019 passed by the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru in Criminal Appeal No.130/2017 acquitting the accused for the offence under Section 417 IPC suffers from any error or illegality warranting reversal by this Court.

¶53

Court's answer

On close perusal of the testimony of PW1, the victim willingly participated in sexual intercourse with the accused on several occasions over a period of about three years.

¶52

Ratio / Principle

The Court found no error or illegality in the impugned judgment of acquittal passed by the Appellate Court and accordingly dismissed the State's appeal as devoid of merits.

¶53

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Appeal No. 1798 of 2019 (A) — State appeal under Section 378(1) and (3) Cr.P.C. against acquittal. The accused, charge-sheeted for offences under Sections 417 and 506 IPC on allegations of sexual intercourse with the complainant on a promise of marriage (followed by pregnancy, abortion tablets, a panchayath and refusal to marry with threats), was convicted under Section 417 IPC by the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Chikkamagaluru in C.C.No.01/2014 (judgment dated 19.07.2017) and acquitted under Section 506 IPC; his appeal (Criminal Appeal No.130/2017) was allowed by the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru, acquitting him under Section 417 IPC by judgment dated 06.04.2019. Before the High Court (G Basavaraja, J., oral judgment dated 31.10.2025): on close perusal of PW1's testimony the victim had willingly participated in sexual intercourse with the accused several times over a period of about three years; the Court found no error or illegality in the appellate acquittal and dismissed the State's appeal as devoid of merits. Precedents reported as relied on by the first Appellate Court (not independently applied by this Court): D.S.Karthik v. State by R.T.Nagar Police Station, (2017) 2 KCCR 1047; Uday v. State of Karnataka, AIR 2003 SC 1639; Zindar Ali Sheikh v. State of West Bengal and another, (2009) 3 SCC 761 (consensual sex does not constitute an offence under Section 417 IPC).

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:43699 CRL.A No. 1798 of 2019

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31^ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

¶7

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1798 OF 2019 (A)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

STATE BY RURAL POLICE, CHIKKAMAGALURU, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI RANGASWAMY R, HCGP)

¶12

AND:

¶13

SRI.CHANDAN, S/O. BASAVEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/AT NARAGANAHALLI VILLAGE, HIREKOLALE POST, CHIKKAMGALURU TALUK-577101.

¶14

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYAN N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

…RESPONDENT THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.378(1) AND (3) CR.P.C BY THE SPP FOR THE STATE PRAYING THAT THIS HONBLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO a) GRANT LEAVE TO APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED 06.04.2019 PASSED BY THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT CHIKKAMAGALURU IN CRL.A.NO.130/2017 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 417 OF IPC. b) SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED 06.04.2019 PASSED BY THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT CHIKKAMAGALURU IN CRL.A.NO.130/2017 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 417 OF IPC. c) CONFIRM THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF CONVICTION DATED 19.07.2017 PASSED BY THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., CHIKKAMAGALURU IN C.C.NO.01/2014 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 417 OF IPC. d) CONVICT AND SENTENCE THE

¶16

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:43699 CRL.A No. 1798 of 2019

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

RESPONDENT - ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 417 OF IPC, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶20

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

¶22

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶23

Heard on admission.

¶24

The appellant/State has preferred this appeal against

¶25

the judgment of acquittal passed by the II Addl. District and Session Judge, Chikkamagaluru in Criminal Appeal No.130/2017 dated 06.04.2019.

¶26

For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as per their status before the trial Court.

¶27

The brief facts leading to this appeal are that the Circle Inspector of Police, Chikkamagaluru have submitted the charge- sheet against the accused for the offence of Section 417 and 506 IPC. It is alleged by the prosecution that there was a love affair between the complainant and accused, he took the complainant to the

¶28

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:43699 CRL.A No. 1798 of 2019

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

house situated in the land, which was taken by the father

¶31

of the complainant on lease near Ukkunda village and had sexual intercourse with the complainant and by saying that he is going to marry her. Subsequently, the accused took the complainant to his house situated at Naraganahalli village and there also the accused had sexual intercourse with the complainant and by believing the words of the accused, the complainant had consented for sexual intercourse. Further the complainant became pregnant and accused gave the tablets for abortion and subsequently there was a panchayath. That in the panchayath the accused agreed to marry the complainant and they have submitted the application before the Sub-Registrar, Chikkamagaluru. Further, the accused refused to marry the complainant. When the complainant requested the accused to marry her, the accused gave threat to her life. Accordingly, the accused has committed the alleged commission of offences.

¶32

¶33

NC: 2025:KHC:43699 CRL.A No. 1798 of 2019

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

The case was registered against the accused

¶36

and summons were issued to him, in response to summons the accused appeared and was enlarged on bail. The trial Court has framed the charges for the alleged commission of offences, same were read over and explained to the accused. Having understood the same, accused has pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

¶37

To prove the case of prosecution, in all, 15 witnesses were examined as PWs1 to 15 and 29 documents were marked as Exhibits P1 to P29. On closure of prosecution side evidence, statements of the accused under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure were recorded. The accused has totally denied all evidence of prosecution witness. However, he has not chosen to lead any defence evidence on his behalf.

¶38

Having heard, the arguments on both sides, the

¶39

trial Court has acquitted the accused for the offence under Section 506 IPC and convicted the accused for the offence under Section 417 IPC. Being aggrieved by this order

¶40

¶41

NC: 2025:KHC:43699 CRL.A No. 1798 of 2019

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

passed by the trial Court, the accused/appellant has preferred the appeal before the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru, the appeal came to be allowed and the accused was acquitted for the offence under Section 417 of IPC. Being aggrieved by this acquittal judgment passed by the Appellate Court the State has preferred this appeal.

¶44

I have examined the materials placed before this Court. The trial Court has observed that the facts and circumstances of the case on hand disclose that there is consensual sex and certainly it was not a misconception of facts.

¶45

The Appellate Court has relied on the decision of this Court in the case of D.S.Karthik Vs.State by R.T.Nagar Police Station reported in (2017) 2 KCCR

¶46

1047 . Further the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Uday Vs. State of Karnataka reported in AIR 2003 SC 1639 and in the case of Zindar Ali Sheikh

¶47

¶48

NC: 2025:KHC:43699 CRL.A No. 1798 of 2019

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

Vs. State of West Bengal and another reported in

¶51

(2009) 3 SCC 761 has held that the consensual sex between the accused and the complainant will not constitute an offence of Section 417 of IPC.

¶52

On close perusal of testimony of PW1, it is clear that along with accused the victim willingly participated in the sexual intercourse on several times over a period of 3

¶53

years. I do not find any error/illegality in the impugned judgment of acquittal passed by the Appellate Court. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

¶54

ORDER

¶55

Appeal is dismissed as devoid of merits.

¶56

Sd/(G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE

¶57

KBM

¶58

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2

State by Rural Police v. Sri.Chandan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State by Rural Police v. Sri.Chandan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Pradeep R. Hattangadi Vs State by Central Bureau of Investigation

Charan H v Vs State of Karnataka by

J.C Flowers Asset Reconstruction Co. Pvt. Ltd., Vs Prakash S B

The State of Karnataka Vs Jagadish Shetty

Sri Gangadharappa Vs Sri S Chandrappa

State of Karnataka Vs Dayananda Poojari