The credibility of the testimony of a prosecutrix is crucial in cases of sexual offenses, and it must inspire confidence and be worthy of credence to form the basis for conviction.

JUDGMENT

Rajesh Sekhri, J. - This Acquittal Appeal has been directed against the judgment dated 30.01.2016 delivered by learned Principal Sessions Judge, Udhampur (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') in Crime No. 100/2012 of Police Station Udhampur in File No. 22/Session, vide which respondents have been acquitted of the charges.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the prosecutrix (name withheld) lodged a written report in Police Station Udhampur alleging inter alia that respondents/accused Beli Ram, Pinky Devi, Shahnaz, Seema Devi and Subash Chander were running brothels in different parts of Udhampur with the aid and assistance of other accused persons. The allegation of the prosecutrix is that while she was living in the house of her aunt near Housing Colony, Udhampur for studies, she was trapped by her neighbourer namely, Pinky Devi (the respondent). One Shahnaz alias Rozy and respondent-Seema Devi resident of Dhar Road used to visit Pinky and son of Beli Ram also used to come there. The prosecutrix further alleged that about one and a half years ago, respondent-Pinky took her to the house of Rozy where Beli Ram was present and both of them forced her to satisfy their friend Rozy. She was locked in a room of Rozy. Beli Ram blackmailed to defame her. Thereafter, she was taken to the house of respondent-Seema Devi at Dhar Road. Seema had taken a room on rent for flesh-trade where girls use to be called and submitted to the customers. It is allegation of the prosecutrix that she was also pushed to the flesh-trade and an amount of Rs. 1,000/- used to be charged from the customers, out of which the said women (Seema and Shahnaz alias Rozy) would keep Rs. 500/- and Rs. 500/- was paid to her. According to the prosecutrix, Pinky, Shahnaz and Seema were running brothels at Shiv Nagar and Dhar Road where innocent young girls used to be trapped, deceived and pushed to the flesh-trade. Some males including Beli Ram and Boby, husband of Seema were also involved in the said trade. The prosecutrix further goes on to alleges that on 02.06.2012 while she was returning home after paying obeisance, in Kali Mata Temple at Rambal, accused Pinky and Beli Ram instead of alighting her from their Maruti Car bearing No. JK14A-5343 at Morda Morh, forced her for prostitution and while they were about to take her to the house of Seema for some customers, she dissuaded them and jumped out of the running car.

3. On the receipt of this report, the police agency, swung into action, registered the FIR and the investigation came into vogue.

4. During investigation, the investigating agency raided a room in Ward No. 11, Shiv Nagar, Udhampur, taken on rent by accused Shahzada alias Rozy alias Shahnaz Begum W/o. Mohd. Gulsher, in the presence of Executive Magistrate 1st Class and on house search, besides accused Shahnaz alias Rozy, accused Joginder Kumar, Ashok Kumar, Shoukat Ali were present in the said room, who were identified by the prosecutrix and on search of the room, some objectionable material was recovered and seized. During investigation, the aforesaid persons confessed that they use to visit the said room to satisfy their sexual lust. Accordingly, site map was prepared. Subsequently, the room obtained on rent by respondent Seema Devi w/o. Permanand in the house of Rakesh Kumar in Ward No. 15 Shakti Nagar, Udhampur, was also raided in the presence of the Executive Magistrate 1st Class, where respondent-accused Seema Devi alongwith others were present and objectionable material was recovered and seized from the said room as well. The investigating agency recorded statements of the witnesses u/s. 161 Cr.P.C and on being satisfied that accused-respondents were involved in flesh-trade in different locations in Udhampur and that all the accused were either involved in rape, pushing the young girls to the flesh-trade or running brothels, presented a final report in terms of Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1989 (Cr.P.C for sho