IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH, CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH, JJ.
Binda Rai @ Vinda Ray, Son of Chandradeo Rai - Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar and Ors. - Respondents
Criminal Appeal (DB) No.816 Of 2021
Decided On : 15-11-2022
POCSO - Acquittal of Offences - IPC 302/34, 201/34, 376, 376D, POCSO Act 4, 6 - Section 29 of POCSO Act - The court examined the confessional statement made by co-accused Ravindra Rai and found no material evidence connecting respondents No. 2 to 4 with the alleged occurrence except the confessional statement, which has no evidentiary value. The trial court's opinion is a reasonably possible view and does not require interference by the Court.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant alleged that his ten-year-old granddaughter was killed, and her dead body was found with multiple injuries. The prosecution's case was based on witness testimonies and confessional statements made by the accused.
Finding of the Court:
The trial court acquitted respondents No. 2 to 4 of the charges based on the confessional statement made by a co-accused, as there was no material evidence connecting them to the alleged occurrence.
Issues: The main issue was the sufficiency of evidence to convict respondents No. 2 to 4 of the alleged offences.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the confessional statement made before the police by a co-accused had no evidentiary value and there was no material evidence connecting respondents No. 2 to 4 with the alleged occurrence.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, upholding the trial court's acquittal of respondents No. 2 to 4.
JUDGMENT :
(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J.)
By a judgment and order dated 18.09.2021 passed by learned Exclusive Special Judge (POCSO) Saran at Chapra in Sessions Trial (POCSO) No. 27 of 2019, arising out of Amanur P.S. Case No 41 of 2017, respondents No. 2 to 4 have been acquitted of the charge of commission of offence punishable under Sections 302/34, 201/34, 376, 376D of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to “I.P.C.” in short) and Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to “POCSO Act” in short), which is under challenge in the present appeal preferred by the informant/victim under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C. for short).
2. We have heard Radha Mohan Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr. Sujit Kumar Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
3. It is considered apt to notice first the prosecution’s case, as disclosed in the fardbeyan of the informant, which is the basis for registration of F.I.R.. The appellant in his fardbeyan before the police on 11.03.2017 at 4:15 pm. alleged that on 10.03.2017 at about 7:00 pm., when he was feeding his cattle at his old house, he looked for her ten-year-old granddaughter but she was not found. Under the presumption that she might have gone to her mother in her new house, he did not enquire about her any further. He also thought that she might have gone to attend a feast at the house of one Radha Singh of Village Dhorlahi, nearly one kilometer away from his house. On the next day on 11.03.2017 at 5:00 am., he again searched for his granddaughter (the victim) at the new house but she was not found. He thereafter started searching for her but could not get any trace of her nor any clue. At about 1:45 pm., on 11.03.2017 the informant learnt from a boy in the village that the victim had been killed and her dead body was lying in the agricultural field of a villager of village Dhorlahi near Apna Hotel. Based on the said information, the informant and his family members reached there and saw the dead body of the deceased lying. Her throat was found cut with a sharp cutting weapon. There were several knife blows on various parts of her body including abdomen. He suspected that someone might have committed rape upon her and killed her thereafter. Based on the said fardbeyan, the F.I.R. came to be registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 376, 201/34 of the I.P.C., and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act. The police submitted its charge-sheet for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 376, 201/34 of the I.P.C., and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act whereafter cognizance was taken. On 16.04.2019 charges were framed for commission of offences punishable under Sections 302/34, 376, 201/34 of the I.P.C., and Section 4 of the POCSO Act. Subsequently, on 09.04.2021 the charges were framed under Section 376D of the I.P.C., and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
4. At the trial, altogether 8 witnesses were examined for the prosecution. The prosecution proved at the trial, signature of the informant (PW-3) on the fardbeyan (Exhibit-1), copy of the fardbeyan (Exhibit-2), formal F.I.R. (Exhibit-3), endorsement on fardbeyan (Exhibit-3/1), postmortem report (Exhibit-4), signatures of members of the medical board on the postmortem report (Exhibit-5), statement of the mother of the deceased (PW-1) recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., (Exhibit-6), death inquest report (Exhibit-7).
5. From the impugned judgment it appears that the gist of deposition of the mother of the victim (PW-1) is that at about 7:00 pm., on the fateful day she was preparing food in her new house when her ten-years-old daughter had gone to fetch water for her grandfather at her old house. One Ravindra Rai, a co-accused had come to his sister’s house in the same village. The said Ravindra Rai had come to her house and asked for some food. After she told him that food was yet to be prepared, he
The evidentiary value of confessional statements made before the police and the requirement of material evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to provide conclusive evidence and corroborative evidence to establish the guilt of the accused beyond all reas....
The prosecution must establish the victim's age as a child under the POCSO Act to invoke statutory presumptions, and the appellate court respects the presumption of innocence in acquittal cases.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on corroborative evidence, including medical reports and witness testimony, to establish the commission of sexual offences. Additional....
The need for strong, compelling, and reliable evidence to prove the guilt of the accused in a criminal case, and the distinction between the trial of Sessions case and the trial held before the Judic....
The prosecution must prove charges beyond reasonable doubt; contradictions and lack of medical evidence led to the acquittal of the accused.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for convincing and sufficient evidence to establish the charge under Section 302/34 of the IPC.
Sexual assault on minor girl – There is absolutely no evidence to indicate that appellants had committed such assault – Appellants acquitted.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.