Karnataka High Court
CRL.A/1601/2024 of THE STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs JAGANATH ACHARYA on 9 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010493242024 NC: 2026:KHC:49245 CRL.A No. 1601 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1601 OF 2024 ( A ) BETWEEN: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1601 OF 2024 (A)
BETWEEN:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
WOMENS POLICE STATION,
UDUPI,
UDUPI DISTRICT,
REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BENGALURU - 560 001
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. K. NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)
AND:
1.
JAGANATH ACHARYA
S/O LATE GOVINDA ACHARYA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT DHARKAS HOUSE,
PATLA HIREBETTU VILLAGE,
UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 107
2.
SRI. MAHESH DEVADIGA
S/O MUTTHU DEVADIGA,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
OCCU: PROTECTION OFFICER,
AT DCPU UDUPI,
UDUPI DISTRICT - 574 118
…RESPONDENTS
Digitally signed
by
ANNAPURNA G
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka
HC-KAR
THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.378(1) (3) CR.P.C BY THE
S.P.P FOR THE STATE PRAYING TO GRANT LEAVE TO APPEAL
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED
02.06.2023 PASSED IN SPECIAL CASE NO.15/2022 BY THE
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC I UDUPI
THEREBY ACQUITTING THE ACCUSED RESPONDENT FOR THE
OFFENCE P/US/ 7, 8 OF POCSO ACT.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL JUDGMENT
ORDER ON I.A.No.1/2024
1. The application is filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act to condone the delay of 330 days in filing this appeal. This application is supported with the Memorandum of facts of M.V.Anoop Kumar, working as High Court Govt. Pleader, Office of the Advocate General, attached to the Office of the State/Public Prosecutor in which it is has stated that the Additional District and
HC-KAR
Sessions Judge/FTSC-1, Udupi, acquitted the accused for the offences under Section 7 and 8 of POCSO Act.
2. The impugned judgment and order of acquittal dated 02.06.2023 was passed in Spl. Case No.15/2022. The learned Public Prosecutor applied for the certified copy of the order on 03.06.2023, thereafter, obtained the copy on 01.07.2023 and furnished the opinion and transmitted the records to the concerned Law Officer (Senior), Mangaluru Division, Mangaluru on 14.07.2023 and in turn, the Law Officer (Senior), Mangaluru Division, Mangaluru on 18.09.2023 transmitted the records to the office of the Inspector General of Police, Mangaluru Division, Mangaluru and opined that it is a fit case to challenge the order passed by the Court below. Same was received in the office of the Advocate General on 05.09.2023.
3. It is further submitted that the entire records along with the certified copy of the order was sent to the office of the State Public Prosecutor and after going
HC-KAR
through the entire records, Memorandum Criminal Appeal was prepared and filed before this Court on 12.08.2024. The Government Order came to be issued and forwarded the records to the office of the Director of Prosecution and opined that it is a fit case to challenge the order passed to the Court below. The State has got very good case on merits and it is likely to succeed in the Criminal Appeal. On all these grounds sought for allowing the application.
4. I have examined the materials placed before this Court. The appellant has not placed any materials to substantiate the averments made in the Memorandum of facts. The affidavit of concerned Law Officer is also not filed. The appellant has not made out sufficient cause to condone the delay of 330 days in filing this appeal. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
HC-KAR
ORDER
I.A.No.1/2024 is dismissed. Consequently, appeal is also dismissed.
Sd/- (G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE
PSJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27