The court acquitted the appellant due to significant doubts regarding the prosecutrix's testimony, particularly concerning consent and her age during the alleged offences as per IPC and POCSO standards.

JUDGMENT :

MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J.

1. The present appeal arises out of the conviction rendered by the Court of Sessions in proceedings arising out of FIR No. 132/2013 registered under Sections 376 /120B/506 IPC at P.S. Bindapur.

2. The appellant was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 328 /506 IPC and Section 6 POCSO. He, however, was acquitted of the offence under Section 384 .

3. Vide the order on sentence passed on 05.02.2020, the appellant was directed to undergo RI for a period of 10 years and pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- in default whereof he would undergo SI for 6 months, for the offence punishable under Section 6 POCSO; undergo RI for a period of 5 years and pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- in default whereof he would undergo SI for 6 months, for the offence under Section 328 IPC and undergo RI for a period of 6 months, for the offence under Section 506 . All the sentences were directed to run concurrently and the benefit under Section 428 Cr.P.C. was provided to the appellant.

4. The investigation in the present case commenced when a complaint from the prosecutrix was received on 19.03.2013, resulting in the registration of the subject FIR. In the complaint, it was claimed that the prosecutrix and her family used to reside as tenants under the tenancy of the appellant's father in the same building as the appellant and his family. The appellant, being the son of the landlord, had misbehaved with the prosecutrix, for which he was even rebuked by the prosecutrix's mother. On 21.11.2012 at about 05:00 PM, the appellant, on the pretext of showing the prosecutrix some books, called her to his house and gave her a drink laced with a sedative, on drinking which the prosecutrix fainted. When she regained consciousness, she realised that the appellant had committed rape upon her. She did not disclose the incident to anyone. On the next day, the appellant came to her school and asked her to accompany him, and when she refused, he threatened to disclose the incident to her father. Out of fear, she accompanied him and was again raped by the appellant in his house. Thereafter, the act was repeated multiple times and even recorded by the appellant on his mobile phone. The ultrasound of the prosecutrix revealed that she was pregnant, on which she was asked by the mother of the appellant to bring money from her house. She stole Rs.50,000/- from her own house and gave it to the appellant and his mother. The appellant's mother and brother threatened her not to disclose the happenings to anyone. After completion of the investigation, charges were framed, to which the appellant as well as the co-accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

5. Pertinently, the appellant was tried along with his brother, Shiv Lok Dubey, and mother, Smt. Pan Kumari Dubey, who were both acquitted of the offence under Sections 384 /34 and convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 506 /34 IPC . They were sentenced to the period already undergone by them in custody.

6. The prosecution examined 19 witnesses in support of its case.