Allahabad High Court

State Of U.P. vs Charan Singh S/O Raghuvar Dayal on 13 November, 2024

Bench: Ashwani Kumar Mishra, Gautam Chowdhary





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:178390-DB
 
Court No. - 43
 

 
Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 312 of 2024
 

 
Appellant :- State of U.P.
 
Respondent :- Charan Singh S/O Raghuvar Dayal
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Ashutosh Kumar Sand
 

 
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

(Ref: Criminal Misc. Delay Condonation Application)

Heard.

Delay in filing the present appeal is explained to the satisfaction of the Court. Delay is, accordingly, condoned.

Application stands allowed.

Ref: Appeal

This appeal is by State alongwith an application for grant of leave to challenge the judgment of acquittal dated 1.6.2024, passed by the court below in Special Case No.107 of 2023 (State Vs. Charan Singh), arising out of Case Crime No.151 of 2022, whereby accused-respondent has been acquitted under Sections 376(3), 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Chaubia, District Etawah.

Informant is the mother of the victim, who has lodged a report stating that her fifteen year old daughter (victim) is mentally unstable. On 18.5.2022 at about 7.00 in the morning the victim had gone to buy namkeen from the shop of the accused, who took advantage of victim being alone and subjected her to sexual assault. The victim informed such facts to her mother and when a grievance in that regard was raised the victim was harassed. Despite an application made to the police station on 18.5.2022 no report was lodged. When report was made to the Superintendent of Police on 28.5.2022 the police officials got the matter resolved on the basis of a compromise. Thereafter an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved which also was rejected. However, on a subsequent application moved before the concerned District Superintendent of Police an FIR has been lodged in the matter nearly four months after the incident. On the basis of investigation conducted in the matter a charge-sheet came to be submitted against the accused under Sections 323, 376(1), 504, 506 IPC read with Section 3/4 POCSO Act. Charges were framed by the court of Sessions after committal of case and after the accused denied the accusation the trial commenced in the matter.

The informant has been produced as PW-1 while the victim has been produced as PW-2. The doctor, who had medically examined the victim has been produced as PW-4. PW-5 is the Principal of the institution where the victim allegedly studied. PW-4, PW-6, PW-7 and PW-8 are formal police witnesses. PW-9 is an independent witness.

In addition to the oral testimony the prosecution has placed on record various document including the application to obtain admission in class 9 as well as the transfer certificate of class 8. Copy of the scholar register has also been placed on record. Evidence led by the prosecution has been confronted to the accused, who stated that next to the house of informant there is an open piece of land belonging to brother of the accused which was being unlawfully used by the informant. This open piece of land was surrounded by fence annoyed by which the FIR has been lodged in the matter. The fact of rejection of application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is also alleged to have been suppressed.

Trial court on the basis of evidence led in the matter has come to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt.

Learned AGA, however, submits that the finding of the trial court, in this regard, is perverse and requires interference in this appeal.

We have heard Sri Pankaj Kumar Tripathi, learned AGA for the State and have perused the material on record including the judgment of acquittal.

The trial court has framed solitary issue for consideration in the present case as to whether the accused person hurled abuses on the victim and her mother and also extended threats after sexually assaulting the minor victim?

So far the minority of the victim is concerned, the transfer certificate of class 8 has been relied upon by the prosecution in addition to the date of birth of victim mentioned in class 9 certificate according to which her date of birth was 5.9.2008.

However, the victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has clearly stated that she has only studied up to class 1. The radiological age of the victim has been determined as 16 years.

Trial court has taken note of the statement of the informant according to which the victim was mentally unstable. This statement of the informant is found to be corroborated by the other evidence on record. The statement of the victim has been taken note of in order to observe that she has been utterly inconsistent in her deposition before the court. Trial court has noticed that in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. the victim has allged that she was cleaning utensils in the house when the accused came and assaulted her, whereas in her statement under Section 164 she has stated that the place of occurrence was the room inside the shop where she had gone to get namkeen. The Investigating Officer has stated that the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. had told him that she was cleaning utensils when the accused came and subjected her to sexual assault. The victim has otherwise stated that as and when the accused wanted he would call her and establish physical relations. She has further stated that physical relations was formed by her with other boys of the village and the lane in which she used to live. She also stated that she does not know the name and address of the boys. She has also stated that all this was done with her own consent. The victim has further stated that she was never medically examined rather it was her mother who was medically examined. From the aforesaid statement of the victim an inference has been drawn that the irresponsible statements are being made by the victim which adversely reflects of her mental state. Though no medical opinion is available on record to substantiate the inference that victim was medically unsound or unstable but the nature of statement made by the victim clearly raises a serious doubt with regard to mental stability of the victim. To state that the victim would call number of boys inside her house and would agree to have physical relations with them is a statement which ordinarily would not be made by a victim, particularly when details in that regard are not on record. The trial court has also noticed that the victim had no external or internal injuries on her body and her hymen was found old torn and healed. The informant has alleged that the victim is mentally unstable. On the vaginal slabs prepared from the victim no blood or semen/spermatozoa was found. Since the victim has been found to be wholly inconsistent, therefore, the trial court has not treated her to be a reliable witness and in the absence of any other corroboration of the allegation the trial court has disbelieved the prosecution case. The only independent evidence of PW-9 is also not reliable, inasmuch as the statement of the said witness is based upon the disclosure made to him by certain other persons, who allegedly saw the victim with the accused in naked state. Since the statement is at best a hearsay statement it has rightly been disbelieved. The trial court, in such circumstances, has come to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt. By granting benefit of doubt to the accused the court of Sessions has acquitted the accused.

Law is settled that ordinarily a judgment of acquittal will not be interfered with, unless perversity or illegality is shown. The scope of interference by High Court in matters of acquittal by trial court has been considered by the Apex Court in the case of Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar v. State of Karnataka, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 561. Para 39 and 40 of the judgment are relevant for the present purposes and are reproduced hereinafter:-

"39. Thus, it is beyond the pale of doubt that the scope of interference by an appellate Court for reversing the judgment of acquittal recorded by the trial Court in favour of the accused has to be exercised within the four corners of the following principles:-

(a) That the judgment of acquittal suffers from patent perversity;

(b) That the same is based on a misreading/omission to consider material evidence on record;

(c) That no two reasonable views are possible and only the view consistent with the guilt of the accused is possible from the evidence available on record.

40. The appellate Court, in order to interfere with the judgment of acquittal would have to record pertinent findings on the above factors if it is inclined to reverse the judgment of acquittal rendered by the trial Court."

Upon evaluation of evidence so led in the matter, we find no perversity in the judgment so as to interfere with the findings returned by the court concerned, inasmuch as the conclusions drawn by the Judge concerned are clearly permissible in view of the evidence placed on record. No misreading or omission of evidence is pointed out, either. It cannot be said that only the view consistent with the guilt of accused is possible from the evidence on record. We, thus do not find any good ground to entertain the present appeal. The prayer made by the State for grant of leave is refused. The appeal, consequently, fails and is dismissed.

Order Date :- 13.11.2024