Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3. On the basis of complaint of Child victim, FIR No. 346/12, PS Palam village was registered and the matter was taken up for investigation. During the course of investigation, statement of child victim and other witnesses under section 161 Cr.P.C was recorded.

4. After completion of investigation, accused was charge sheeted for the offences u/s 377/341/506 IPC and u/s 4 of POCSO Act, 2012 and chargesheet was directly filed before this court. After taking cognizance, accused was summoned and copy of chargesheet was supplied to him.

13.In his cross examination by accused, PW3 deposed that he is staying in Delhi since 1984 at the same address. PW3 deposed that the date of birth of the child victim is 09.11.1995. PW3 deposed that on the date of incident, child victim had alone gone to the school. PW3 deposed that no statement of maternal uncle of child victim was recorded by the police. PW3 denied that he has deposed falsely and no incident took place with the child victim. PW3 deposed that in his presence, statement of child victim was recorded by the police. PW3 deposed that SC No.07/02/2013 PS.Palam Village State Vs. Rameshwar Dayal 15­20 persons had accompanied him alongwith the child victim to the police station. PW3 deposed that no statement of public persons was recorded. PW3 denied that said public persons were present when the statement of child victim was recorded in the police station. PW3 deposed that the statement made by him to the police U/s 161 Cr.P.C and whatever he has deposed in the court are correct. PW3 denied that he is deposing falsely as to falsely implicate accused in the present case.

23.PW9 Head Constable Sunder Lal deposed that on 15.12.2012, one DD regarding missing of one boy child victim was handed over to him and thereafter, he flashed the said message. PW9 deposed that on 19.12.2012 at about 7.30 pm, the missing boy alongwith his father came to police station and he made inquiry from child victim and his father. PW9 deposed that thereafter, he produced the child victim alongwith his father before SHO and on the directions of SHO, he alongwith W SI Ramwati took the child victim and his father to their house and on reaching there, W SI Ramwati recorded the statement of child victim. PW9 deposed that W SI Ramwati prepared rukka and handed over the same to him for getting the case registered. PW9 deposed that after registration of the case, he returned to the house of child victim alongwith copy of FIR and rukka and SC No.07/02/2013 PS.Palam Village State Vs. Rameshwar Dayal handed over the same to W SI Ramwati. PW9 further deposed that child victim led them from his house to the house of accused and father of the child victim also accompanied them. PW9 deposed that at that time, accused was present at his house. PW9 proved the arrest memo and personal search of accused vide documents already Ex.PW3/A and Ex.PW3/B. PW9 deposed that from there, he took accused to the hospital for his medical examination where he was medically examined. PW9 deposed that after medical examination, doctor handed over him two sealed pullandas which he handed over to W SI Ramwati. PW9 proved the seizing of said pullandas by W SI Ramwati vide seizue memo Ex. PW9/A.

25.PW10 WSI Ramwati is the investigation officer of the present case. PW10 deposed that on 19.12.2012 at around 5.00 p.m.on receipt of DD No. 37A, she alongwith HC Sunder Lal reached at B­199, Phase II, Mangla Puri, Palam Colony, New Delhi where complainant/child victim alongwith his father met them. PW10 proved the recording of statement of child victim vide Ex.PW1/A. PW10 deposed that after registration of FIR, HC Sunder Lal handed over to her copy of FIR and original rukka. PW10 deposed that child victim was sent to DDU hospital through HC Sunder Lal for his medical examination. PW10 also proved the seizure memo SC No.07/02/2013 PS.Palam Village State Vs. Rameshwar Dayal Ex.PW10/B vide which two sealed pullandas were taken into possession by her after medical examination of child victim. PW10 deposed that she alongwith HC Sunder Lal and child victim went in the search of accused Rameshwar and reached to his house i.e. B­114, Mangla Puri, Phase - II, Palam Colony, New Delhi where accused was not present. PW10 deposed that owner of the house namely, Anita Verma met them and she told her that accused is friend of her son. PW10 deposed that she recorded the statement of Anita Verma and from the house of Anita Verma, they went to the house no. B­77, Mangla Puri, Palam Colony, New Delhi where accused was found. PW10 deposed that at the instance of child victim, she apprehended accused and interrogated. PW10 proved the preparation of site plan vide Ex.PW10/C. PW10 deposed that accused was sent to DDU Hospital for his medical examination through HC Sunder Lal. PW10 further deposed that during investigation, child victim was produced before the Ld. MM and his statement was recorded u/s 164 Cr.PC. PW10 deposed that during investigation, the documents pertaining to the age of child victim were obtained from school.