HC rejects prosecution plea, says no evidence

Bengaluru, NT Bureau: The High Court has upheld the acquittal of a 42-year-old woman and her 34-year-old paramour in the alleged sexual exploitation of the former’s daughter.

The High Court while pointing out to the “reluctance in conducting a quality trial” by both the prosecution and the Sessions Court said that the allegations against them are not proved.

The case dates back to 2015 when the alleged victim was studying in 4th standard in a school in Bengaluru. The first accused is a paramour of the victim’s mother who is a widow.

The mother is the second accused. He allegedly committed rape on the victim girl in in the house of the latter. Though her mother knew of it, she allegedly allowed the act. The assault continued for ten more days.

The victim girl vomited in her classroom and after being asked revealed about the incidents. The class teacher sent her to the police station with staff members where the victim filed a complaint against her mother and her paramour.

A case was registered under Section 376 (rape) of the IPC and under various sections of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

The Trial Court however acquitted the accused. The State therefore filed an appeal in the HC which was heard by Justice HB Prabhakara Shastry and Justice Anil B Katti.

The HC noted that though there were 13 witnesses in the case, none of them were examined by the prosecution.

“The Court also did not ask the prosecution to examine other material witnesses, including the panchas for the various panchanamas and the School Teacher. It also did not examine the other school teachers. Thus, both the prosecution and the Sessions Judge's Court appears to have shown some reluctance in conducting a quality trial in the matter and have decided the fate of the accused the moment the victim girl is shown to have not supported the case of the prosecution and given up all other m a t e r i a l witnesses,” the HC said.

Though the HC concurred with the Session Court’s judgement of acquitting the accused, it was not happy with the manner of the trial.

“We are not happy about the manner in which the trial was conducted in the Sessions Judge's Court. The charge framed against accused No.1 shows that the alleged act of sexual intercourse and rape was taken place on the night at 12.00 p.m. on 25.12.2014, whereas, the point that was raised for consideration by the Sessions Judge's Court has shown the date, time and place of occurrence of the incident on 24.12.2014 at 12.00 a.m,” the HC said. (CrLA 356/2017)