Bangalore District Court
State By Hebbal Police vs Mohammed Faraz on 12 October, 2020
BEFORE THE CHILD FRIENDLY COURT,
BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT.
Dated this the, 12 th day of , October, 2020.
Present: SMT.R.SHARADA,B.A. M.L
LIV ADDL., CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, [CCH:55]
SITTING IN CHILD FRIENDLY COURT,
BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT.
SPL CC NO.847/2018
COMPLAINANT: State by Hebbal Police,
Bangalore City.
(By Learned Public Prosecutor)
-Vs -
ACCUSED: Mohammed Faraz,
Son of Mohammed Ameer,
Aged 23 years,
Residing at Akbari Maseedi Road,
Besides New India Public School,
Chamundinagar, R.T.Nagar Post,
Bangalore-32.
[By Advocate Sri. Syed Shiraz ]
1. Date of commission of offence From 1.9.2018 to 5.9.2018
2. Date of report of occurrence 5.9. 2018
of the offence
3. Date of arrest of accused 05.10.2018
Date of release of the accused
08.02.2019
on bail
Period undergone by the
4 Months 3 days
accused in the judicial
custody
2 Spl CC No.847/2018
4. Date of commencement of 21.12.2018
evidence
5. Date of closing of evidence 6.10.2020
6. Name of the complainant Sri.Mehaboob Pasha, complainant as well as the father
of the victim girl.
7. Offences complained of Secs.363, 366(A), 376, 506 of IPC and
[As per charge-sheet] Secs. 4 and 6 of POCSO Act 2012
8. Opinion of the Judge The accused is acquitted .
JUDGEMENT
The Police Inspector, Hebbal police station has filed charge-sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Secs. 363, 366(A), 376, 506 of IPC and Secs. 4 and 6 of POCSO Act 2012.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case is that, the complainant who is none other than the father of the victim girl had lodged a missing complaint stating that, his daughter/ victim girl who was aged 16 years that on 1.9.2018 went out of the house but did not turn up. Inspite of her search, she was not traced out. The complainant suspected that the accused might have kidnapped his daughter. Hence, the complainant has requested to trace out his daughter. On the basis of the said complaint, the complainant police have registered a case in Cr.No.170/2018 against the accused for the offence punishable under Sec.363 of IPC and commenced investigation. During the course of 3 Spl CC No.847/2018 investigation, on 10.9.2018 the victim girl was traced out and on her enquiry, she revealed that, she was knowing the accused and that on 1.9.2018 in the evening at 4.30 P.M., when she was proceeding towards her teacher's house situated at 4 th Cross, Seethappa Layout, Bangalore, the accused came in 2 wheelers vehicle and made her to sit on the bike forcibly and from there the accused took the victim girl to a lodged named Albek Lodge, R.T.Nagar, Bangalore and offered her some juice, when she drank the said juice, she felt unconscious,thereafter from 1.9.2018 to 3.9.2018 they were in the said room only and at that time, the accused has committed rape/ aggravated penetrative sexual assault on her . On 3.9.2018, at 1.30 A.M., in the early morning hours, the accused took her in a car to Denahalli Lodge and they stayed in the said Lodge for 3 days and in the said lodge, the accused had sex with her. On 5.9.2018, they roamed together from one place to another. On 10.9.2018, in the morning at 8.30 A.M., the accused made her to sit in an auto and to go to her grandfather's house and there in the said house her aunt's son informed to her parents and thereby she came to know that her parents had lodged missing complaint. Hence on the basis of the said statement, the Investigating Officer has inserted 366(A), 376, 506 of IPC and Secs. 4 and 6 of POCSO Act 2012 and continued with the further investigation by arresting the accused on 5.10.2018. The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the witnesses and after completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted charge-sheet against this accused in Spl CC No.847/2018. Thereafter as per Orders 4 Spl CC No.847/2018 dated: 08.02.2019 the accused was released on bail from the hands of this court.
3. As per the provisions of Sec.207 of Cr.P.C, copies of the charge-sheet furnished to the accused. Accordingly charge is framed, read over and explained to the accused, he pleaded not guilty, claims to be tried. Accordingly, the trial is fixed, summons issued to the prosecution witnesses.
4. The prosecution has examined 11 witnesses as PWs-1 to 11 and got marked 21 documents as Exs.P1 to P21 besides marking MOS-1 to 12. As per Sec.33(2) of POCSO Act 2012, the evidence of the victim girl has been recorded in the presence of her father. Thereafter Statement of the accused recorded under Sec.313 of Cr.P.C. The accused has denied all the incriminating evidence told to him, but he has not examined any witnesses on his behalf and no documents are marked.
5. Heard the arguments of the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the accused. On perusal of the oral and documentary evidence, at this stage, following Points arise for my consideration:
1. Whether the prosecution proves that, on 1.9.2018 in the evening at 4.30 P.M., when CW2 / victim girl being minor in age was proceeding from her house bearing No.6, 5th Cross, Babureddy Layout, Manorayanapalya, Hebbal, Bangalore, towards Seetappa Layout 4 th Cross Road, Bengaluru, the accused kidnapped her and kept her in a lodge room bearing No.403 of Kings Gateway, R.T.Nagar, Bengaluru, thereby the accused has 5 Spl CC No.847/2018 committed an offence punishable under Sec. 366 of IPC?
2. Whether the prosecution further proves that, on the same day and at the same time and at the same place, the accused not only kidnapped CW2/ victim girl but kept her in the above said Lodge Room from 1.9.2018 to 3.9.2018 and committed rape/ aggravated penetrative sexual assault on her knowing that she was minor and again on 3.9.2018, the accused took CW2/ victim girl to another Lodge by name R.V. Lodge, situated at Devanahalli, Bengaluru and took a room bearing No.104, and kept her in the said room and committed rape/ aggravated penetrative sexual assault on her repeatedly, thereby the accused has committed an offence punishable under Sec.376 of IPC and under Secs. 4 and 6 of POCSO Act 2012 ?
3. What Order?
6. My findings on the above points are as under:
Point Nos.1 and 2: In the Negative, Point No .3: As per the final order, for the following:
REASONS
7. POINT NOS.1 AND 2:- These Points are inter-linked to each other, hence, they are taken up together for common discussion in order to avoid repetition of facts and evidence.
8. During the course of arguments, the learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that in order to prove the prosecution case totally 11 witnesses are examined as PWs-1 to 11 and documents are marked as Exs.P1 to P21 besides marking 6 Spl CC No.847/2018 MOS-1 to 12. Though the victim girl and other her parents have not supported the case of the prosecution but the court has to look into the facts and circumstances of the case along with available evidence of the prosecution to bring home the guilt of the accused. In the present case, the police officials have totally supported the case of the prosecution the complainant approached the police with a complaint, registered as FIR, taken up investigation, traced out the victim girl as well as the accused recorded statements drawn mahazar finally after completion of investigation, submitted charge-sheet against the accused. Even the doctor who has conducted physical examination of the victim girl has supported the case of the prosecution that the victim girl was subjected to sexual assault by the accused. The evidence of prosecution witnesses is not contradicted by the counsel for the accused. Apart from that, according to Sec.29 of POCSO Act, 2012, there is burden casted upon the accused to prove his innocence, but, he has failed to chose to examine any of the witness on his behalf, thereby, the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubts and the accused has to be convicted and he prays to convict the accused in the interest of justice and equity.
9. Per contra, the learned counsel for the accused submitted that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. The victim girl and her parents have totally turned hostile to the prosecution case when they were subjected to the cross-examination by the learned Public Prosecutor, these witnesses have denied all the suggestions put to 7 Spl CC No.847/2018 them supporting their chief evidence. When all these material witnesses not supported the case of the prosecution, considering only the evidence of the Lady Doctor who physically examined the victim girl and the evidence of the police officials the court cannot convict the accused for the offences as alleged. Even the prosecution has not examined the Learned Magistrate before whom the victim girl has given her statement under Sec.164 of Cr.P.C. On all these grounds, the accused is entitled for an order of acquittal. Hence, the learned counsel for the accused prays to acquit the accused in the interest of justice and equity.
10. I have perused the oral and documentary evidence furnished by the prosecution before this court. The prosecution in order to prove its case has examined as many as 11 witnesses, out of them, PW1 /CW2 is the victim girl, PW2/ CW1 is the father of the victim girl, PW3/CW3 is the mother of the victim girl, PW4/ CW5 is the Owner of the Lodge, PW5/ CW7 is the witness to the Mahazar as per Ex.P2. PW6/CW8 is also one of the witness to the Mahazar as per Ex.P2. PW7/CW9 is the witness to the Seizure Mahazar as per Ex.P9. PW8/CW21 is the Woman PSI.
PW9/CW24 is the Police Inspector/ Investigating Officer of this case. PW10/ CW22 is the ASI and PW11/ CW12 is the Lady Doctor who has examined the victim girl. In support of its case, the prosecution has also produced the following documents: Ex.P1 is the complaint, Ex.P2 is the Panchanama. Ex.P3 is the Further statement of PW2. Ex.P4 is the statement of PW3. Ex.P5 is the statement of the victim girl given under Sec.164 of Cr.P.C before the Learned Magistrate. Ex.P6 is the statement of the victim girl given 8 Spl CC No.847/2018 under Sec.161 of Cr.P.C before the complainant police. Ex.P7 is the ID proof of the accused. Ex.P8 is the Guest Register of R.V.Lodge, Devanahalli, Bangalore. Ex.P9 is the Seizure panchanama. Ex.P10 is the study certificate of the victim girl. Ex.P11 is the Medical Report of the accused. Ex.P12 is the report. Ex.P13 is also the report. Ex.P14 is the Seizure Panchanama. Ex.P15 is the Guest Registration Form of Kings Gateway Lodge. Ex.P16 is the FSL Report. Ex.P17 is the sample seal. Ex.P18 is the FIR. Ex.P19 is the Medical Report of the victim girl. Ex.P20 is the Acknowledgement issued by FSL, Madiwala, Bangalore and Ex.P21 is the Out Patient Record of the victim girl. The prosecution has also got marked Material Objects as MOS- 1 to 12.
11. Now coming to the evaluation of the evidence given by the above stated prosecution witnesses , I would like to take up firstly the evidence given by the victim girl who is examined before this court as PW1. PW1 in her evidence has deposed about her family status. Further she has deposed that, she knows the accused and she has identified the accused in the accused platform located in the court hall. Further she has deposed that, she is studying 10 th standard in SMEC North School, situated at Chamundinagar, Bengaluru. On the date of the incident, she had not gone to her teacher's house by name Lakshmi and she did not even return to home. After 8 days, she came to home. She has further deposed that, she was in physical relationship with the accused. As her elders had not agreed for their relationship, herself and the accused went to RT Nagar to a lodge and when she was staying with the accused in the said lodge, the accused has not done 9 Spl CC No.847/2018 anything to her. She do not know whether her parents have lodged a complaint. The police have not enquired with her. She was sent before the Magistrate for recording of her statement under Sec.164 of Cr.P.C. The said Statement is as per Ex.P5 and her signature is s per Ex.P5(a). She has also identified her signature on the statement recorded under Sec.161 of Cr.P.C which is as per Ex.P6 and her signature is as per Ex.P6(a). She do not know the contents of Exx.P5 and P6. The accused has not done anything to her. Other than this, she do not have anything to say. The learned Public Prosecutor treated this witness as hostile and subjected her to cross-examination. In her cross-examination, she has denied that the accused had kidnapped her and kept her in a lodge at Devanahalli and committed rape on her. She has also denied that, she has given statements as per Exs.P5 and P6. But the signatures belongs to her. She has stated that, she has not given any statement before the Learned Magistrate. She has denied that, though the accused kidnapped and raped her, she is deposing falsely. She has admitted that, the elders of her family and the accused family have decided to give her in marriage with the accused after she attains majority. But she has denied that, for that reason, she is deposing falsely, because if she speaks out the truth, her future life will be affected. This witness was not cross- examined by the learned counsel for the accused.
12. PW2 is the father of the victim girl and PW3 is the mother of the victim girl. In their evidence before the court, these 2 witnesses have deposed that, CW2 is their daughter. They have identified the accused in the accused platform located in the court 10 Spl CC No.847/2018 hall. Their daughter is aged 16 years and she is studying in10 th standard and she goes to school at 8.45 A.M., and returns back home at 3.30 P.M.. Further they have deposed that, as their daughter was missing, PW2 had lodged a missing complaint. Their daughter went to school but she did not turn up, inspite of her search, she was not traced out. The Complaint is marked as per Ex.P1 and the signature of PW1 is marked as Ex.P1(a). The Mahazar is as per Ex.P2 and her signature is as per Ex.P2(a). After 1 to 2 days of lodging the complaint, their daughter was traced out and on her enquiry, she did not tell anything to them. She was taken to the police station, the police enquired with their daughter. Other than this, they do not have anything to say. They have not given any complaint. The learned Public Prosecutor treated these 2 witnesses as hostile and subjected them to cross- examination. In their cross-examination, they have denied that, the accused had kidnapped their daughter on 1.9.2018 at 4 P.M., and he took their daughter to Devanahalli Lodge and committed rape on their daughter. PW2 has denied that he has given further statement as per Ex.P3 and PW3 has denied that she has given statement to the police as per Ex.P4. They have admitted that, their family and the accused family have decided to give their daughter in marriage with the accused after she attains majority. But they have denied that, for that reason, they are deposing falsely, because if they speak out the truth, future life of their daughter will be affected. These 2 witnesses were not cross- examined by the learned counsel for the accused.
11 Spl CC No.847/201813. PW4 is the owner of the Lodge by name R.V Lodge situated at Devanahalli, Bangalore. In his evidence before the court he has deposed that, he is the owner of the said Lodge and he knows the accused and he has identified the accused in the accused platform located in the court hall. About one year back to the date of giving his evidence, the accused had come to his lodge along with his wife. The accused had told that the said girl is his wife and he had alloted Room No.104 to the accused by obtaining the ID Proof of the accused. The accused and the said girl vacated the room on the arrival day itself. The girl had worn Burkha, so he could not see her face. He has further deposed that, 6 months after vacating the lodge by the accused, the police had come to the said lodge with the accused and he has identified the accused and also he has shown the ID Proof of the accused. The said ID proof of the accused is as per Ex.P7. The Guest Register extract maintained the said Lodge is as per Ex.P8 and his signature is as per Ex.P8(a). This witness was cross-examined by the learned counsel for the accused. In his cross-examination, he has denied that the accused and the girl had not come to his Lodge.
14. PW5 and PW6 are the witnesses to the Mahazar as per Ex.P2 as well as father and son respectively. In their evidence before the court when Ex.P2-Mahazar was confronted to them, they have identified their signatures on Ex.P2 as per Ex.P2(b) and P2(c) respectively. PW5 has stated that CW2/ victim girl is his grand- daughter. PW6 has stated that CW2/ victim girl is her elder sister's daughter. Further they both have deposed that, 8 months back to the date of giving their evidence, CW1 had lodged a complaint and 12 Spl CC No.847/2018 the police had come and they put their signatures. The Mahazar was conducted in the evening. These 2 witnesses have been cross- examined by the learned counsel for the accused. In their cross- examination, they have admitted that, they have put their signatures on Ex.P2 in the police station. They have also admitted that, they do not know the contents of Ex.P2. They have also admitted that, they have not read over the contents of Ex.P2.
15. PW7 is the Room boy working in RV Lodge, Devanahalli, Bengaluru as well as witness to the seizure Mahazar as per Ex.P9. In his evidence before the court, he has deposed that, since 3 years back to the date of giving his evidence, he is working in the said Lodge. He has not identified the accused when shown to him. When Ex.P9-Seizure Mahazar was shown to him, he has identified his signature on it as per Ex.P9(a). On 9.10.2018, Hebbal police had come to their lodge and took Ledger book and DL copy and ID card of the accused. The witness has deposed that, he will do the work of brining things to the Lodge. This witness was cross- examined by the learned counsel for the accused. In his cross- examination, he has stated that, he do not to write and read Kannada language. The contents of Ex.P9 was not read over to him. The police have not given any notice to him before conducting Mahazar. He has admitted that, he is seeing first time the accused in the court hall. He do not remember whether he has seen the accused in the lodge or not.
13 Spl CC No.847/201816. Now coming to the evidence given by the Doctor-PW11, she has stated that, on 10.9.2018 at 7.30 P.M., she has examined the victim girl sent by Hebbal Police along with the Request with the history of Kidnap and rape. After taking the consent of the mother, of the victim girl, she has examined the victim girl. On physical examination, she has found that the victim girl was aged bout 16 years as on the date of examination, the victim girl was developed according to her. On genital examination, the hymen of the victim girl was not intact. Accordingly she has given the Medical Report of the victim girl which is as per Ex.P19 and her signature is as per Ex.P19(a) and the signature of the mother of the victim girl is as per Ex.P19(b). The Out Patient Record of the victim girl is as per Ex.P21 and her signature is as per Ex.P21(a). She has also collected the articles from the victim girl which are as per MOS-1 to12. According to her clinical examination, she is of the opinion that, the victim girl is used to an act like that of sexual intercourse. The FSL Report is as per Ex.P16 and the Sample seal is as per Ex.P17. Thereby, this witness has performed her statutory duty. This witness was cross-examined by the learned counsel for the accused. In her cross-examination, she has admitted that in Ex.P16, Spermatozoa were not detected in any of the articles. She has also admitted that, as per Ex.P16, there is no signs of recent sexual intercourse on the victim girl.
17. Now coming to the evidence given by the police officials, I would like to take up firstly the evidence given by PW10-ASI, who has deposed before the court that, on 5.9.2019, he has received the typed complaint given by CW1 and the said complaint is as per 14 Spl CC No.847/2018 Ex.P1 and his signature is as per Ex.P1(b). After receiving the complaint, he has prepared FIR in Cr.No.170/2018 and sent the FIR to the jurisdictional court and copy of the same to his higher officers. The FIR is as per Ex.P18 and his signature is as per Ex.P18(a). On the same day, he has conducted spot Panchanama and the said Panchanama is as per Ex.P2 and his signature is as per Ex.P2(b). Thereafter he has handed over the case file to CW23 for further investigation. Thereby this witness has performed his statutory duty. This witness was cross-examined by the learned counsel for the accused. In his cross-examination, he has denied that, CW1 had not given any typed complaint to him. He has also denied that, he do not know the contents of Ex.P1. He has also denied that, he has not conducted spot panchanama. He has also denied that, as per the say of his higher officers, he is deposing falsely.
18. PW8 is the Woman PSI. In her evidence before the court she has deposed about the recording of the statement of the victim girl on 10.9.2018. She has recorded the statement of the victim girl as told by the victim girl to her. The said Statement is as per Ex.P6 and her signature is as per Ex.P6(b). She can identify the victim girl if shown to her. Thereby, this witness has performed her statutory duty. This witness was cross-examined by the learned counsel for the accused. In her cross-examination, she has denied that, she has not recorded the statement of the victim girl. She has also denied that she has created Ex.P6 for the purpose of this case. She has also denied that, she is deposing falsely in order to help CW23.
15 Spl CC No.847/201819. PW9 is the Police Inspector/ Investigating Officer of this case. In his evidence before the court he has deposed that, on 29.9.2018, he has received the case papers of this case from CW23 and verified it and continued with further investigation and deputed his staffs ie., CWS-17 and 18 for tracing out the accused. On 5.10.2018, the said staffs have traced out the accused and produced before him and he has recorded the voluntary statement of the accused and in this regard, CW17 has given Report. The said Report is as per Ex.P13 and his signature is as per Ex.P13(a). On 6.10.2018, he has produced the accused before the court. On the same day, he has recorded the statements of CW3 and 4 and also recorded the further statement of CW1. Further he has deposed that, on 9.10.2018, he has conducted the Mahazar of RV Lodge, Devanahalli, as shown the accused in Room No.403 and drawn Seizure Mahazar. On 29.10.2018, he has collected the documents pertaining to the date of birth of the victim girl from CW14 and the said document is as per Ex.P10 and his signature is as per Ex.P10(a). On 15.11.2018, he has obtained the Medical Report of the accused as per Ex.P11 and his signature is as per Ex.P11(a). On 6.7.2019 he has obtained the FSL Report which is as per Ex.P16 as well as 12 articles. The 12 articles are as per MOS-1 to 12, he has also recorded the statements of CWs-6 to 9 and 11. After completion of investigation, he has submitted charge-sheet against the accused. Thereby, this witness has performed his statutory duty. This witness was cross-examined by the learned counsel for the accused. In his cross-examination, he has denied that, he has filed false charge-sheet against the 16 Spl CC No.847/2018 accused. He has also denied that, he is giving false evidence before the court.
20. Considering the evidence of the above prosecution witnesses, particularly, the evidence of the victim girl and her parents all these 3 witness have totally turned hostile to the prosecution case and they have not supported the case of the prosecution to bring home the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt that, the accused eloped the victim girl, took her along with him and kept her in different lodges and committed rape/ aggravated penetrative sexual assault on her repeatedly, knowing fully well that the victim girl was a minor. Hence, there is no chain to link the accused with the alleged crime. Though the evidence of the police officials are corroborative that, the victim girl was subjected to sexual assault by the accused and the victim girl was subjected to medical examination and the accused was arrested, but, they do not come to the aid of the prosecution, as because PWs-1 to 3 have totally turned hostile to the prosecution case and they have not supported the prosecution case. Even the Lady doctor who has physically examined the victim girl and given the Medical Report and opined that, the hymen of the victim girl was not in-tact, but this evidence also do not come to the aid of the prosecution, as the victim girl herself has not supported the prosecution case. Though the woman PSI who has been examined before the court as PW8 who has recorded the statement of the victim girl as told by the victim girl to her, but this witness is only a hear-say witness as told to her by the victim girl. The victim girl and her parents in their evidence have stated that, the elders of 17 Spl CC No.847/2018 the family of the victim girl and the elders of the family of the accused have arranged the marriage of the victim girl with the accused after she attains majority and because of that reason, it seems that the victim girl and her parents have not supported the prosecution case. The Victim girl except identifying her signatures nothing has deposed against the accused to hold that the accused has committed the offence as alleged against him. Thereby, I am of the view that the accused is entitled for an order of acquittal from the hands of this court. Of course, the presumption under Sec.29 of POCSO Act, 2012 goes against the accused but, the prosecution has to prove its case by furnishing cogent evidence but it failed to do so, thereby, I hold that, the prosecution has not proved the guilt of the accused and the accused is entitled for an order of acquittal. Accordingly, I answer Point Nos.1 and 2 in the Negative.
21. In the present case, as per the discussions made by me herein above, the victim girl has deposed before the court that, she has not suffered any sexual assault on her from the accused and further she deposed that, her marriage is going to be arranged with the accused after she attains majority. Considering these aspects, I find no reasons to award compensation to the victim girl as per the provisions under Rule 7 of POCSO Rules 2012, as such no compensation is awarded to the victim girl.
22. POINT NO.:-:- In view of my findings on Point Nos.1 and 2 above, I proceed to pass the following:
18 Spl CC No.847/2018ORDER Acting under Sec.235(1) of Cr.P.C, I hereby acquit the accused of the offences punishable under Sec.366 of IPC, Sec.376 of IPC and Secs. 4 and 6 of POCSO Act 2012 .
The bail bond and surety bond of the accused stands cancelled.
MOS-1 to 12 being worthless are ordered to be destroyed after the appeal period is over.
[Dictated to the Stenographer directly on the computer, corrected carried out and then pronounced by me in the court through V.C. (zoom) on this the 12 th day of October, 2020] [R.SHARADA] LIV ADDL., CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, [CCH:55] SITTING IN CHILD FRIENDLY COURT, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT.
ANNEXURES:
Witnesses examined for the prosecution:
PW1 Victim girl CW2 21.12.2018
PW2 Mehaboob Pasha CW1 28.1.2019
PW3 Tasmin Begum CW3 28.1.2019
PW4 Lakshminarayana CW5 16.9.2019
PW5 Mohammed Ziaulla CW7 16.9.2019
PW6 Mohammed Yaseen Khan CW8 16.9.2019
PW7 Karthik CW9 6.11.2019
19 Spl CC No.847/2018
PW8 Premakumari CW21 21.9.2020
PW9 R.T.S.Khan CW24 21.9.2020
PW10 H.L.Krishna CW22 24.9.2020
PW11 Dr.Krupa CW12 6.10.2020
Documents marked for the prosecution:
Ex.P1 Complaint dated: 5.9.2019 lodged by the
complainant/ PW2/father of the victim girl to the complainant police.
Ex.P1(a) Signature of PW2
Ex.P1(b) Signature of PW10
Ex.P2 Spot Panchanama
Ex.P2(a) Signature of PW2
Ex.P2(b) Signature of PW5
Ex.P2(c) Signature of PW6
Ex.P2(d) Signature of PW10
Ex.P3 Further statement of PW2 given to the
complainant police.
Ex.P4 Statement of PW3 given before the complainant
police under Sec.161 of Cr.P.C
Ex.P5 Statement of PW1/ victim girl given before the
Learned Magistrate under Sec.164 of Cr.P.C Ex.P5(a) Signature of PW1/ victim girl Ex.P6 Statement of PW1/ victim girl given before the complainant police under Sec.161 of Cr.P.C Ex.P6(a) Signature of PW1/ victim girl Ex.P6(b) Signature of PW8 Ex.P7 ID Proof of the accused Ex.P7(a) Signature of PW4 Ex.P8 Guest Register of the Lodge wherein the victim girl and the accused has stayed Ex.P8(a) Signature of PW4 Ex.P9 Seizure Panchanama Ex.P9(a) Signature of PW7 Ex.P9(b) Signature of PW9 Ex.P10 Study Certificate of PW1/ victim girl issued by the Head Mistress, Subhash Memorial English High School, R.T.Nagar, Bengaluru wherein PW1/ victim girl was studying showing the date of birth of PW1/ victim girl as 23.5.2003 20 Spl CC No.847/2018 Ex.P10(a) Signature of PW9 Ex.P11 Medical Report of the accused [consent marked] Ex.P11(a) Signature of PW9 Ex.P12 Report given by CW15-Vanitha Nayak-Woman PC for having taken PW1/ victim girl of this case to Bowring Hospital and bringing her back along with the sealed articles of PW1/ victim girl and producing them before the Police Inspector of the complainant police station [consent marked] Ex.P13 Report given by CW17-Khalid Ahmed- Head constable with regard to tracing out the accused, apprehending him and producing him before the Police Inspector of the complainant police station Ex.P13(a) Signature of PW9 Ex.P14 Seizure Mahazar Ex.P14(a) Signature of PW9 Ex.P15 Guest Registration Form of Kings Gateway, R.T.Nagar, Bangalore Ex.P15(a) Signature of PW9 Ex.P16 FSL Report Ex.P17 Sample Seal Ex.P18 FIR Ex.P18(a) Signature of PW10 Ex.P19 Medical Report of PW1/ victim girl Ex.P19(a) Signature of PW11 Ex.P19(b) Signature of PW3 Ex.P20 Acknowledgement issued by FSL, Madiwala, Bengaluru [consent marked] Ex.P21 Out Patient Record Ex.P21(a) Signature of PW11 Material Objects marked for the prosecution:
MO-1 Green Top
MO-2 Green Leggins
MO-3 Panty
MO-4 Cream colour bra
MO-5 Scarf
MO-6 Bhurkha
21 Spl CC No.847/2018
MOS-1(a) to 6(a) Signatures of PW11
Mos-7 to 12 Sealed covers
MOs-7(a) to 11(a) Signatures of PW11
Witness examined, documents, MOs marked for the accused: NIL [R.SHARADA] LIV ADDL., CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, [CCH:55] SITTING IN CHILD FRIENDLY COURT, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT.22 Spl CC No.847/2018
12.10.2020 Judgment pronounced in open court:
[ Vide separate detailed Judgment] Acting under Sec.235(1) of Cr.P.C, I hereby acquit the accused of the offences punishable under Sec.366 of IPC, Sec.376 of IPC and Secs. 4 and 6 of POCSO Act 2012 .
The bail bond and surety bond of the accused stands cancelled.
MOS-1 to 12 being worthless are ordered to be destroyed after the appeal period is over.
[R.SHARADA]] LIV ADDL., CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, [CCH:55] SITTING IN CHILD FRIENDLY COURT, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT.23 Spl CC No.847/2018