Mangaluru POCSO Court Acquits Accused in Minor Kidnapping and Sexual Assault Case
By Senior Reporter
The Second Additional District and Special POCSO Court in Mangaluru has acquitted a man accused of kidnapping and sexually assaulting a minor girl, stating that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt.
The case had drawn attention after allegations surfaced in July 2025. The court’s verdict highlights the importance of evidentiary standards in criminal trials under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
- Second week of July 2025: Alleged incident near Bappanadu Temple, Mulki.
- 23 July 2025: Complaint registered by Mulki Police; accused arrested.
- Medical examination indicated the minor was pregnant.
- Charge sheet filed before Second Additional District and Special POCSO Court, Mangaluru.
- Eight witnesses examined; 26 documents and one mobile phone marked as evidence.
- Judgment delivered acquitting the accused due to lack of conclusive evidence.
According to the prosecution, the accused allegedly took the minor girl on a motorcycle from near Bappanadu Temple in Mulki and transported her to a forested area near Kapu Beach in Udupi district, where sexual assault was alleged to have occurred. It was also claimed that the accused threatened the girl not to disclose the incident.
The complaint was registered on 23 July 2025, following which police arrested the accused on the same day. During medical examination, authorities found that the girl was pregnant. Investigators later submitted a final report before the Special Court designated under the POCSO Act.
The trial was conducted on a fast-track basis. The victim and her parents testified before the court. The prosecution examined eight witnesses and produced documentary evidence to support its case.
However, the court, presided over by Judge K.S. Manu, concluded that the prosecution did not establish the charges beyond reasonable doubt. As per the judgment, the available evidence was not sufficient to secure a conviction under the applicable legal standards.
The Special POCSO Court observed that criminal conviction requires proof beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that the prosecution evidence lacked sufficient corroboration to conclusively establish guilt.
The accused was represented by advocate Sukesh Kumar Shetty of Mangaluru.
What Is Officially Confirmed
The court has formally acquitted the accused after trial. Police had registered the case and filed a charge sheet. Witnesses were examined, and documentary evidence was presented.
What Is Not Proven or Remains Unverified
The court found that the allegations could not be conclusively proven in accordance with criminal law standards. The judgment does not establish criminal liability. Any further legal steps, such as appeal, have not been publicly confirmed at the time of publication.
The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, is a central law enacted to protect minors from sexual offences. Trials under the Act are conducted in designated Special Courts to ensure speedy and child-sensitive proceedings.
Legal experts explain that even in serious allegations, conviction requires credible and consistent evidence that satisfies the standard of “beyond reasonable doubt.” If gaps exist in testimony or corroboration, courts may grant acquittal.
This judgment underscores the evidentiary burden in criminal cases. While allegations involving minors are treated with seriousness under law, courts are bound by procedural safeguards and proof standards.
The case also highlights the need for thorough investigation, forensic documentation, and witness consistency in sensitive trials.
FAQs
1. What was the accused charged with?
The accused was charged with kidnapping and sexual assault of a minor under relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code and the POCSO Act.
2. Why was the accused acquitted?
The court ruled that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt.
3. Does acquittal mean the incident did not occur?
An acquittal means the charges were not legally proven in court. It does not make independent factual determinations beyond the judicial findings.
4. Can the verdict be challenged?
In criminal law, the prosecution has the right to file an appeal in a higher court, subject to legal procedure.
Disclosure
This report is based on court proceedings and official records available at the time of publication. Legal processes may evolve if appeals or further actions are initiated.
Defence Lawyer in the Case The accused in the case was represented by Advocate Sukesh Kumar Shetty, a practising lawyer based in Mangaluru. He appeared on behalf of the accused before the Second Additional District and Special POCSO Court during the trial proceedings.References / Sources
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – Government of India
- Official court proceedings of Second Additional District and Special POCSO Court, Mangaluru (July 2025)
.png)
