Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

At about two months prior to filing of the complaint, during the first recess in the school, at about 12.00 noon, complainant/victim girl was playing in the school premises along-with other Cri. Apeal 934.14.doc students. At that time, accused No.2 called her in the office, and told her to clean the room where rice was stored (for short, "rice room"), which was adjacent to the office of head mistress. As soon as complainant went inside the said rice room, accused No.2 bolted the door of the said room from outside. Accused No.1 was present in the said room, and he caught hold the hands of complainant and then kept her on the bench by removing her wearing clothes, and thereafter snapped the photographs of the chest and private part of complainant, on his mobile. So also, accused No.1 laid the victim girl on gunny bag (Gonpat) and pressed her breast and also told her to take his private part into her mouth, which she refused and so, accused No.1 penetrated his penis into the private part of the complainant and also threatened her to keep quiet. Accused No.1 told complainant to wear her clothes, and also threatened her that if she endeavor to disclose Cri. Apeal 934.14.doc the incident to others he will beat her like dog.

14. The prosecution has examined PW-1 victim girl (henceforth we would refer her as "victim girl-X"). The incident took place in the year 2012 when the age of victim girl-X was 12 years. Her evidence was recorded in camera. The record of the trial Court shows that as the victim was minor, initially the trial Court has asked some questions to the victim girl-X to ascertain whether she knows the difference between true and false and the importance of oath. At the time of recording the evidence of informant - victim girl-X in 14 (2004) 1 SCC 475 Cri. Apeal 934.14.doc camera, the trial Court has allowed the mother of the victim girl-X i.e. informant, and also one lady police officer to be present. The evidence of informant shows that she was residing along with her mother, two sisters and one brother. At the time of recording her evidence, she was studying in P.N.P. school at village Mothi Jui. Her evidence shows that she studied up-to 7th standard at Primary School at village Mothi Jui. While studying in Primary School in 7th standard, accused No.1 was her class teacher and accused No.2 was Headmistress of the school. Her evidence further shows that she was studying in 7th standard, division A in Primary School and her class room was near to the office of Headmistress i.e. accused No.2. There was a computer room near the office of Headmistress. The school time from Monday to Friday was 10.30 a.m. to 5.00 p.m. and on Saturday the school time was from 7.00 a.m. to 11.00 a.m. Their short recess from Monday to Cri. Apeal 934.14.doc Friday was at 12.00 noon and the lunch recess was at 1.30 p.m. till half and hour. Accused No.1 used to teach her all the subjects. In absence of accused No.1, another teacher namely Pol or accused No.2 used to teach the students. Her evidence further shows that accused No.1 used to ask her whether she was undergoing M.C. period and whether to give pills/tablets for it. While attending the classes in the class room, Accused No.1 used to ask her, whether she is taking air from beneath side at the sitting place. Accused No.1 used to beat the boys with rod, and also used to beat the girls on buttock. Her uniform was half shirt and petticoat. Her evidence further shows that Accused No.1 used to catch hands of girl students and touch their breasts/chest due to which the girl students feel ashamed. Accused No.1 used to threaten the girls that, in case they disclose the incident to someone else, he would beat them mercilessly.

Cri. Apeal 934.14.doc

15. The evidence of PW-1 victim girl-X further shows that two months prior to filing of the report, accused No.2 called her during the lunch period and told her to clean the room where the rice was stored, and so she went in the said rice room. When she entered into the said room, accused No.2 bolted the door of the said room from outside. Accused No.1 was already present in the said room. Accused No.1 caught hold her hands and pulled her towards him. She tried to rescue but accused No.1 stripped her clothes and laid her on a mattress. Accused No.1 also removed his clothes. Accused No.1 penetrated his private part into her private part. She tried to cry but said accused threatened her to beat. Said accused No.1 also pressed her breasts. Accused No.1 snapped photographs of her breast and private part on his mobile. Then accused No.1 told her to wear the clothes and also gave call to accused No.2.

Cri. Apeal 934.14.doc

20. We have carefully perused the evidence of victim girl (PW-1). As she was minor at the time of recording her evidence, the trial Court has taken every precaution and asked her certain questions to ascertain whether she knows the difference between true and false. Considering the nature of case, the statement of informant victim girl-X was recorded in camera. Though at the time of recording evidence of the informant, mother of the informant and one lady Police Officer were present, if the provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Rules, 2012 are perused, it provides that a support person to take care of the child can accompany the child victim during the course of proceedings. The informant has specifically stated about the sexual assault by accused No.1. She has specifically stated that accused No.2 forced her to go into the rice room and bolted the said room from the outside. The record of the Trial Court shows that for entering Cri. Apeal 934.14.doc in the rice room, one has to go through the office of head mistress (accused Vanita). The victim girl-X further stated that accused No.1 was already present in the said rice room. She has in clear words stated about the sexual assault committed by accused No.1. Her evidence further shows that accused No.1 snapped photographs of her breast and private part on his mobile and thereafter he gave call to accused No.2 who removed the door bolt of the room from outside. The evidence of PW-1 further shows that after some days again she was called in the school by accused No.1 and forced her to remove her clothes and again snapped photographs of her breast and private part on his mobile and threatened her not to disclose the incident to anybody. Her evidence further shows that at one time, as she did not respond to the call of accused No.1 and did not act as per his say, accused No.1 assaulted her by throwing duster towards her in the class room Cri. Apeal 934.14.doc which struck on her head due to which she suffered giddiness. Thus it appears that evidence of PW-1 is trustworthy and reliable. She had given rational answers to the questions which were put to her. So as to ascertain her competency to depose before the Court. Though the prosecution has brought on record few contradictions and omissions regarding the spot, benches in the school, date, month and year of the incidents, in our opinion, the said contradictions and omissions are of a minor nature and do not affect substratum of the prosecution case.