Bangalore District Court
Unknown vs Naveen Kumar on 2 January, 2020
IN THE COURT OF THE LIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS SPECIAL JUDGE,
BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2nd DAY OF JANUARY, 2020
-: PRESENT :-
S.H.PUSHPANJALI DEVI, B.A. LL.B.,
LIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Special Judge,
Bengaluru.
SPECIAL C.C.No. 124/2019
COMPLAINANT :
The State of Karnataka
By Yelahanka New Town Police Station,
Bengaluru.
[Rep. by Public Prosecutor]
/ VERSUS /
ACCUSED:
Naveen Kumar
S/o Nagaraju,
Aged about 23 years,
R/at. No. 330, C/O Muniyappa.
Budigere Road, Bagalur,
Bengaluru City.
[Rep. by Mr. VRB - Advocate]
2
Spl.C C.124/2019
TABULATION OF EVENTS
1. Date of Commission : 29/11/2018
Of Offence
2. Date of Report
Of Offence : 30/11/2018
3. Date of Arrest of
Accused
: 16/12/2018
4. Date of Release on Bail
Accused : 17/7/2019
5 Period undergone in
Judicial Custody by : 7 months 1 day
Accused
6 Name of the Complainant : Smt. Kamala Y.M.
7. Date of Commencement :
of recording evidence 26/6/2019
8. Date of Closing of :
29/08/2019
Evidence
9. Charges framed : Sections 366, 376 IPC and 5(l)
R/w 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.
10. Opinion of the Judge : As per final Order
(S.H.PUSHPANJALI DEVI)
LIII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Special Judge,
Bangalore.
3
Spl.C C.124/2019
JUDGMENT
This Charge Sheet is filed by the Police Inspector of Yelahanka New Town Police Station, Bengaluru City, against the Accused for the offences punishable under Sections 366-A, 376 of IPC and 4, 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.
2. The brief facts of the case of the Prosecution are that on 29/11/2018 the Accused with an intention to marry the minor Victim CW-4, the daughter of CW-5, Kidnapped her from the hostel at ISRO Extension, took her to many Temples, and on 13/12/2018 went to the house of his Aunt CW-8 at Bannur and made the Victim to stay in that house till 15/12/2018, during that period he had Sexual Intercourse with her forcibly.
4
Spl.C C.124/2019
3. Subsequently, the Warden of Hostel at ISRO Extension gave the complaint to the Yelahanka New Town Police Station on 16/12/2018 and case registered against the Accused in Crime No. 282/2018 for the offence punishable under Sections 376 of IPC and 4 , 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.
4. The Accused was arrested on 16/12/2018, produced before this Court and he was remanded to Judicial Custody. Thereafter, he was represented through the learned Counsel. He was granted bail by this Court on 17/7/2019 and released on 19/7/2019, after furnishing the Sureties.
5. Subsequently, the Investigating Officer has completed the Investigation and filed Chargesheet against the Accused for the offences punishable under Sections 376 IPC and 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012. This court has taken cognizance of the said 5 Spl.C C.124/2019 offences and after hearing the arguments of learned Public Prosecutor and learned Counsel for the Accused, as primafacie materials found against the Accused, framed charges for the offences punishable under Sections 376 IPC and 5(l) and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012. The said Charges were read over and explained to the Accused, he has not pleaded guilty and claims to be tried.
6. The Prosecution has examined 7 witnesses out of 22 witnesses as PWs 1 to 7. The documents are marked as Ex.P-1 to 11, P-1(a), 2(a),6(a), 7(a)(b)(c)
(d), 11(a). The CWs 20, 22 and 23 remained absent in spite of Proclamation, therefore, the prayer for reissue the same was rejected and this Court has closed the evidence of Prosecution. 6
Spl.C C.124/2019
7. The Incriminating Circumstances in the evidence of the Prosecution witnesses has been read over to the Accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. He has denied the entire evidence and not chosen to lead any defence evidence on his behalf.
8. Heard, the arguments of learned Public Prosecutor for the State and the learned Counsel for the Accused on merits.
9. The points for my consideration are :
1. Whether the Prosecution proves that the Accused on 29/11/2018 has Kidnapped the minor Victim from the Hostel with an intention to marry, taken to many Temples, thereafter kept her in the house of his Aunt CW-8 till 15/12/2018 and forcibly committed Rape and Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault on her ?
2. Whether the Prosecution proves that the Accused has committed the offences punishable under Sections 366-A, 376 IPC and 5(l) and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012?7
Spl.C C.124/2019
3. What Order?
10. My findings on the above points are as under:-
Point No.1 : In the Negative
Point No.2 : In the Negative
Point No.3 As per final order
for the following
REASONS
11. Points No. 1 and 2: The allegations made
against the Accused with regard to the Rape, Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault caused on the minor Victim.
12. In order to prove the above said allegations, the Prosecution has examined the Complainant Smt. Kamalamma as PW-3. She has admitted the Complaint given as per Ex.P-6 and her signature is marked as Ex.P-6(a). She has identified her signature 8 Spl.C C.124/2019 in the Spot Mahazar Ex.P-7 is marked as Ex. P-7(a). She has turned hostile and Cross-examined on behalf of Prosecution.
13. In the Cross-examination, she has admitted the Complaint given as per Ex.P-6, after the Victim was found missing. But she has denied the Mahazar conducted by the Police in front of the Government Girls Hostel as per Ex.P-7, the Statement given as per Ex.P-8 with regard to the Accused after Kidnapping the Victim has committed Rape, which was made out by the Victim herself.
14. The Victim is examined as PW-1 and identified her signature in the Spot Mahazar Ex.P-1, is marked as Ex.1(a). She has identified her signature in the Statement Ex.P-2 given before the Magistrate under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is marked as Ex.P2(a). She has shown ignorance about contents of both the said documents and treated hostile. 9
Spl.C C.124/2019
15. In the Cross-examination, she has not admitted the contents of her Statement Ex.P-3 given with regard to promise made by the Accused to marry her, Kidnapped and forcibly committed Rape after taking into the House of his Aunt at T.Narasipura Taluk. She has also denied the Mahazar drawn by the Police near the said house at Bheema Nagar of T.Narasipura Taluk.
16. The Mother of the Victim Smt. Kamala is examined as PW-2. She has shown ignorance about the Accused and denied Statement given to the Police against him. Therefore treated hostile and in the Cross-examination, her Statement given as per Ex.P-4 with regard to Accused Kidnapped the Victim on the promise to marry and thereafter he had forcibly committed Rape as disclosed by the Victim as stated in the Statement Ex.P-5 is read over to her. But, she has denied the contents of both Statements.
10
Spl.C C.124/2019
17. One of the witness for Spot Mahazar Ex.P-7, Smt. Erapamma is examined as PW-4. She has identified her signature marked as Ex.P-7(b). But, she has shown ignorance of the contents of said Mahazar, therefore treated hostile. In the Cross- examination, she has denied the Mahazar conducted by the Police on 30/11/2018 as per Ex.P-7, in front of the Girls Government Hostel at Yelahanka.
18. Another witness for said Spot Mahazar Sri. Srinivasalu is examined as PW-5. He has identified his signature is marked as Ex.P-7(c). But, he has shown ignorance of the contents of said Mahazar, therefore treated hostile. In the Cross- examination, he has denied the Mahazar conducted by the Police on 30/11/2018 as per Ex.P-7, in front of the Girls Government Hostel at Yelahanka. 11
Spl.C C.124/2019
19. Dr. Hemalatha is examined as PW-6. She has deposed about examining of the Victim, who was brought for Medical examination. Afterwards, she examined her and gave the Medical Certificate as per Ex.P-11 and her signature is marked as Ex.P-11(a). According to her, the Victim gave the Statement that Accused known to her since one year and when she went out the Hostel on 29/12/2018, to bring the book, the Accused took her in the Car and both of them had Sexual Intercourse in the Car itself, thereafter she did not go to the Hostel as frightened about the Warden. Afterwards the Accused took her to Mahadeshwara Hill, Satyamangala and other places and stayed for three days. During their stay together, both of them had Sexual Intercourse with their consent.
12
Spl.C C.124/2019
20. Further stated that, she has collected cloths and other articles of the Victim and sent for Chemical Examination. She has particularly stated in the Cross-examination that not able to say whether the Sexual Intercourse on the Victim committed only by the Accused as the FSL Report not received.
21. The Police Sub-Inspector Mr. Rajanna C is examined as PW-7. He has conducted further Investigation, the Mahazar at the Spot drawnas per Ex.P-7 and his signature is marked as Ex.P-7(d). He has also stated Statements of parents of the Victim were recorded and Cws 16, 17 were deputed in search of the Accused. He has recorded the Statement of Victim in presence of her mother and on the basis of the Statement, sought permission of Court to add Sections 376 of IPC and 4 of POCSO Act, 2012. Afterwards Accused was traced out and produced before him, he has recorded his Voluntary Statement. Thereafter, nine Articles relating to the 13 Spl.C C.124/2019 Victim were received and handed over the case file to CW-22 for further Investigation. He has also recorded the Statements of PWs1 and 3 as per Ex.P-3 and 4.
22. The Prosecution is relied on the evidence of PWs 1 to 7, out of which the Victim, her mother, and Aunt as well as Mahazar witnesses turned hostile. Their evidence is contrary to their Statements given before the police and also the Spot Mahazar conducted at the Spot.
23. The Date of Birth of the Victim as a minor as on the date of incident is not proved. The Study Certificate of Victim issued by Government PU College as per Ex.P-10 marked with Consent will not say anything about her Date of Birth, except showing she was a student of Commerce during the period 2018-19.
14
Spl.C C.124/2019
24. The important aspect is the Victim has not stated anything about Kidnap and Rape committed by the Accused, who was said to be taken her initially to the house of CW-8 at Bannur of Mysore District, kept her till 15/12/2018 from 13/12/2018 and also both of them went around many Temples during the said period, where he has forcibly committed Rape on her. Further her mother also not supported the case of Prosecution in prof of the contents of Statement given before the Police relating to Kidnap and Rape committed by the Accused.
25. Therefore, after taking into consideration the entire evidence of all the above said witnesses is not corroborated with each other, I come to the conclusion that, the Prosecution has failed to prove 15 Spl.C C.124/2019 that the Accused had forcibly Kidnapped the Victim on 29/11/2018, took her to different Temples and kept her in the house of his Aunt at Bannur from 13/12/2018 till 15/12/2018 and forcibly committed Rape and Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault on her, punishable under Sections 376 IPC and 5 (l) R/w 6 POCSO Act, 2012. Hence, I answer points No.1 and 2 in the Negative .
26. Point No. 3: In the result, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Acting under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C. Accused Naveen Kumar S/o Nagaraju is hereby acquitted for offences punishable under Section 366, 376 of IPC and 5(l) R/w 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.16
Spl.C C.124/2019 The bail bonds executed by the Accused and surety under Section 437 (A) Cr.P.C. shall be in force till the completion of appeal period.
(Dictated to the Judgement writer, transcript and computerized by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open Court today on 2nd day of January, 2020.) (S.H.PUSHPANJALI DEVI) LIII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Special Judge, Bangalore.
ANNEXURE
1) List of witnesses examined for the Prosecution PW.1 Victim PW.2 Kamala PW.3 Kamalamma PW.4 Erapamma PW.5 Srinivasalu PW.6 Dr. Hemalatha PW.7 Rajanna.C. 17 Spl.C C.124/2019
2) List of documents marked for the Prosecution Ex.P1 Mahazar Ex.P1(a) Signature of Victim PW-1 Ex.P2 164 Cr.P.C. Statement Ex.p2(a) Signature of PW-1 Ex.P3 Statement of PW-1 Ex.P4 Statement of PW-2 Ex.P5 Statement of PW-2 Ex.P6 Complaint Ex.P6(a) Signature of PW-3 Ex.P7 Mahazar Ex.P7(a) Signature of PW-2 Ex.P7(b) Signature of PW-4 Ex.P7(c) Signature of PW-5 Ex.P7(d) Signature of PW-7 Ex.P8 Statement Ex.P9 Medical Certificate of Accused Ex.P10 Date of Birth Certificate Ex.P11 Medical Certificate of Victim Ex.P11(a) Signature of PW-6
3) List of Material Objects marked for the Prosecution Nil 18 Spl.C C.124/2019
4) List of witnesses examined for the Accused Nil
5) List of documents marked for the Accused Nil
6) List of Material Objects marked for the Accused Nil (S.H.PUSHPANJALI DEVI) LIII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Special Judge, Bangalore.
*** 19 Spl.C C.124/2019 Judgment pronounced in the open court, (vide separate Judgment ) 20 Spl.C C.124/2019 ORDER Acting under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C. Accused Naveen Kumar S/o Nagaraju is hereby acquitted for offences punishable under Section 366, 376 of IPC and 5(l) R/w 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.
The bail bonds executed by the Accused and surety under Section 437 (A) Cr.P.C. shall be in force till the completion of appeal period.
(S.H.PUSHPANJALI DEVI) LIII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Special Judge, Bangalore.