Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

2. BACKGROUND FACTS The victim (PW10), who is the informant, had lodged a report with Police Station, Anjangaon Surji, Dist. Amravati on 19.10.2017. On the report lodged by the informant/victim, the wheels 3 APEAL84.22 (J).odt of the investigation were put into motion. The prosecution case, which can be discerned from the report and the charge-sheet, is that the incident of penetrative sexual assault took place in the month of March- 2017. The appellant/accused is resident of Raver, Dist. Jalgaon. The informant/victim, on the date of the incident, was studying in 12 th standard (Science) at Jaisingh Junior College, Pathrot. The accused had sent a friend request to the victim on Facebook. She accepted the friend request sent by the accused. They got acquainted with each other through Facebook. The accused sent his mobile No. 9033288552 to her. The victim, on being insisted by the accused, shared her mobile No. 8698268569 and 9975175667 with the accused. They would talk with each other on phone. On the request of the accused, she disclosed him that she was studying at Jaisingh Junior College at Pathrot. One day, the accused came to her college at Pathrot to meet her. He made a phone call to her and asked her to come out of the college to meet him. She came out of the college. She recognized the accused as she had seen his photo on Facebook. She was frightened and on that day she did not talk with the accused and left for her house at Kapustalni.

4. It is further the case of the prosecution that the accused uploaded the obscene photographs of the victim on his Facebook account and tagged the same to her sister, Kanchan's Facebook account. The accused sent friend requests to the relatives of the victim. The 5 APEAL84.22 (J).odt accused also sent obscene photographs of the victim on the mobile phones of her relatives and inquired with them whether they knew the victim. The harassment of the accused increased manifold and therefore, she informed her parents about it. They, therefore, decided to lodge the report. The report was lodged with Anjangaon Surji Police Station on 17.10.2017. It was stated in the report that on account of fear of defamation, she did not lodge report with the police. Similarly, her parents had arranged her marriage with Ashish Chabukswar. The accused contacted Ashish and sent the photographs of the victim to him and apprised him that the victim was not possessing good character. On the basis of the report (Exh.58), a crime bearing No. 441/2017 was registered against the accused for the above offences.

16. The evidence of the victim (PW10), in my view, is unbelievable on account of certain facts noted by me hereinabove. If the photographs of the victim had been published or transmitted immediately after the incident of March-2017 on Facebook and WhatsApp accounts of her relatives and friends, then the victim was supposed to report this incident to the police immediately. It is not the specific evidence of the victim that on a particular date or in a particular month she informed about this incident to her parents. In order to find out an answer to this important aspect, it would be necessary to consider the evidence of her father. Her father was testified as PW1. PW1 has stated that on the date of the incident, he had received a phone call from his wife, who told him to see the photographs of their daughter on mobile. He has stated that the wife told him that these were obscene photographs of their daughter. He has stated that he went home. He has further stated that he saw the photographs on the mobile phone of his niece Kanchan and fiance of the victim, Ashish. He has 21 APEAL84.22 (J).odt stated that on the same day, he had inquired with his daughter. He has stated that his daughter narrated to him the incident occurred at her college. He has stated in his further evidence about the incident narrated to him by his daughter occurred in the hotel room. Perusal of his evidence would show that on the date of the incident itself, he came to know about the same. The incident, as can be seen from the record, occurred somewhere in March-2017. The father was confronted with 2- 3 nude photographs of his daughter. He has further stated that Ashish (PW2) had proposed his daughter for marriage after completion of her education. He has stated that the accused gave a threat to Ashish and disclosed his physical relation with the victim. He has stated that the accused had shown those photographs to Ashish (PW2). Perusal of the evidence of the father (PW1) would show that he is silent as to why he did not immediately lodge the report with the police. He has no where stated in his examination-in-chief that a few days prior to lodging the report, this incident was narrated to him by the victim. He has stated that the nude photographs of the victim had been forwarded to Ashish (PW2), the fiance of his daughter. In my view, this conduct of the father of the victim creates a doubt. If PW1 was informed about the penetrative sexual assault on the victim by the accused, then his natural 22 APEAL84.22 (J).odt reaction would have been totally different. He would have immediately taken the victim to the police station. It is to be noted that the father and the relatives of the victim had seen the photographs, which were published or transmitted on Facebook as well as on WhatsApp. It is, therefore, apparent that they had otherwise nothing to hide. Even they could not hide anything because everything was put in the public domain. This fact would show that the father (PW1) came to know about the friendship of the victim with the accused on Facebook. It has come on record in the evidence that since the accused had published her photographs after settlement of her marriage with Ashish, the report was lodged.

17. In this context, it would be necessary to see the evidence of PW2 Ashish Chabukswar. He has stated that the incident took place in the year 2017. He has stated that at the relevant time the victim was studying at Jaisingh Junior College, Pathrot. He has stated that he knew accused Rahul Lahase. He has stated that the accused was the friend of the victim through Facebook. He has stated that his marriage with the victim was settled and it was to be performed after two years. The date and month of the settlement of the marriage has not been stated by 23 APEAL84.22 (J).odt him. He has stated that the accused transmitted the photographs of the victim on his Facebook account as well as on his WhatsApp account. He has stated that those were obscene photographs of the victim. He has further stated that the accused told him that the victim is of bad character and as such, advised not to perform marriage with her. He has further stated that the accused told him that he had physical relations with the victim. He has also stated that the accused transmitted similar photographs of the victim to his friends. Perusal of his examination-in- chief would show that he is silent about the date and month of settlement of his marriage. He is silent about the publication and transmission of the photographs on his Facebook and WhatsApp accounts. He is also silent about any inquiry having been made by him with the victim to verify the correctness of the information conveyed to him by the accused. In his cross-examination, he has stated that he knew that the accused was the friend of his fiance (victim). He has stated that despite that, he agreed to marry with the victim. He has further stated that the parents of the victim were not in a hurry to settle her marriage. He has stated that he did not know since how long the victim and the accused were friends through Facebook.