The judgment emphasizes the standard of proof in criminal law, the presumption of innocence in acquittal orders, and the requirement for reliable corroboration of evidence.

JUDGMENT :

MANMOHAN, J.

CRL. M.A. 40551/2019

Keeping in view the averments in the application, the delay in filing the criminal leave petition is condoned.

Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.

CRL. M.A. 40552/2019 (for exemption)

Allowed, subject to just exceptions.

CRL.L.P. 615/2019

1. Present criminal leave petition has been filed on behalf of the State challenging the judgment/order of acquittal dated 04th June, 2019 passed by Additional Session Judge–06, West, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, in State Case UID No.56015/16, New SC No.147/17 and Old SC No.135/13 titled State vs. Akram arising out of FIR No. 63/13 registered with Police Station Mundka. The Trial Court in its impugned judgment has held as under:-

“33. Thus, the prosecution has failed to prove its case either through the direct evidence of PW8, the prosecutrix, who was the sterling witness of the prosecution or through PW2 & PW3, the grandmother (Nani) & father of the prosecutrix who have also not deposed any incriminating evidence against the accused rather they were declared hostile on behalf of the prosecution and thus, nothing could come on record to state that the accused has committed a wrong act regarding the allegations of sexual assault with the prosecutrix, at any point of time and the testimonies of alleged eye witnesses PW4 & PW7 are not found trustworthy & reliable due to material contradictions in their testimonies.

Also the medical evidence or FSL result & scientific evidence has not suggested anything that any wrong act has been committed with the prosecutrix and thus, it also does not support the prosecution case.

xxx xxx xxx

35. So far as the assumption u/s 29/30 of POCSO Act is concerned, the "assumptions" cannot take place of "proof" and are basically in the form of assumptions raised u/s 304B IPC within law to be read with assumption of section 113B Evidence Act but for the assumptions, it is a settled principle of law as settled by Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of judgments that despite assumption raised in favour of the prosecution, in law the prosecution cannot escape its duty of proving the "guilt" of the accused beyond reasonable doubts as in criminal law, it cannot be the preponderance of probability by which the guilt of the accused is to be proved, but it is system of "standard proof" for proving the case of the prosecution beyond reasonable doubts for holding accused guilty for a criminal offence and if there is any doubt in the prosecution story, then the doubt has to go to the favour of the accused and he is entitled for such benefit of doubt, if the prosecution story is doubtful.”

2. Ms. Aashaa Tiwari, learned APP for the State contends that the Trial Court has failed to appreciate that Naresh (PW-4) and Vinod Kumar (PW-7) are the eyewitnesses who had fully supported the prosecution’s case and had caught the accused while attempting to commit a wrong act with the minor-prosecutrix. She further states that Rajan Mishra (PW-3)-father of the prosecutrix had corroborated the testimony of the aforesaid two eyewitnesses by deposing that he had asked the respondent-accused to drop the prosecutrix – a minor girl aged about five years to his mother-in-law’s house i.e. maternal grandmother of the prosecutrix.

3. Having perused the paper book, this Court is in agreement with the finding of the Trial Court that the complainant / eyewitness Naresh (PW-4) is neither trustworthy nor a reliable witness as he had concealed his relationship with the prosecutrix in his complaint. It was only when the prosecutrix was cross-examined did she reveal that the complainant was her maternal uncle. The relevant portion of the testimonies of Naresh (PW-4), the complainant, as well as that of the prosecutrix are reproduced hereinbelow:-

A. Testimony of Naresh (PW-4):-

“We heard cries of a child from the bushes behind Vaishno Devi Mandir, Nirwal Tikri Road, Delhi and when we went there, we saw that behind the bushes one person, whose name now, I came to know as Akram S/