Read Time: 09 minutes

Synopsis

The Telangana High Court has acquitted a man who was convicted by a trial court for raping a minor girl. The court cited the evidence of the child witness appearing to be tutored by elder family members as the reason for its decision.

A Single judge bench comprising Justice K. Surender, observed: “The evidence of a child witness can easily be influenced by the elders in the family. Acceptance of the child witness evidence would be dangerous in the present circumstances of the case as the evidence appears to be a result of tutoring.”

The case was filed by the victim's mother (PW.1) who alleged that the accused had forcibly entered her house and raped her 10-year-old daughter, while her family members were sleeping nearby. According to the complaint, after dinner, PW.1’s elder son slept on a cot while her husband, daughter (the victim, PW.4), her other son,, and the victim’s grandfather, slept on the floor in a row. At approximately 11:30 PM, PW.1 left the house to chat with neighbours near a temple adjacent to their home and fell asleep at the temple for some time. During this period, the appellant allegedly entered the house and awakened PW.4. Threatening her to stay silent, he forcibly assaulted her, committing sexual intercourse against her will. When PW.1 returned to the house upon being alerted by the appellant that police were nearby, she found her daughter awake. Upon inquiry, the victim recounted the incident, revealing injuries to her private parts, with blood on her clothing and body. PW.1 immediately alerted her husband, family members, and neighbours. The appellant, when confronted, allegedly admitted to the crime but subsequently threatened them and fled the scene.

Notably, the medical records did not support the victim's narration as no signs of forcible rape were found, and the family members who were sleeping in the same room were not examined. On the basis of this, the appellant/accused filed an appeal contesting his conviction ordered by the Additional Sessions Judge (POCSO), dated December 14, 2022. The trial court had convicted the accused under Sections 452 (House-trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint) and 376AB (rape on a woman under sixteen years of age) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 5(i)(j)(m) read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.  The sentencing included rigorous imprisonment for five years for the offence under Section 452 IPC, and a 20-year rigorous imprisonment under the POCSO Act.

The High Court raised questions on the prosecution's version of events, stating that “In the said room of 27x17 size (where the alleged rape happened), when five persons are sleeping it appears to be highly improbable that the appellant had entered into the house without being seen by PW.1 and committed rape on the victim girl forcibly resulting in injuries to her private parts and blood oozing from the private parts, without the other persons i.e., P.W.4 father and grand father waking up. Until P.W.1 entered into the room, all of them were sleeping except P.W.4. After questioning P.W.4, P.W.1 woke up others.”

The court also noted that the doctor who examined the girl did not find any injuries on her body, and the FSL report did not reflect any blood stains on the girl's clothing. Neither was any DNA examination done to verify if the semen found on the clothing of the victim was that of the accused.

The court also found that the appellant’s father and the victim’s grandfather jointly owned agricultural lands, which had been a source of disputes between the families. Following the death of the appellant’s father, the appellant sought his father’s share in the property from the victim’s grandfather, leading to multiple quarrels among the family members. According to the appellant, the present complaint was fabricated to deny him his rightful share in the property.

Aligning with the contention of the appellant, the court noted, “The version projected by the prosecution that the appellant without being seen by PW.1 entered into the house, forcibly committed rape on the victim girl in the presence of four other family members sleeping side by side and thereafter coming out of the house and asking PW.1 to go into the house appears to be made up and the appellant was falsely implicated.”

Conclusively, the court allowed the appeal and acquitted the accused.

 

Case Number: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 88 OF 2024