IMPORTANT POINT
The presumption of innocence remains strong in acquittals, and the prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, especially in cases involving minors.

JUDGMENT :

(Sumeet Goel, J.) :

This appeal is directed against the judgment of acquittal dated 29.09.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum- Exclusive Court for Fast Tracking of Heinous Crimes Against Women, Karnal.

2. Facts pertinent to adjudication of the present appeal as gathered from the trial Court record are that the appellant-complainant on 18.12.2018 moved an application Ex.P-9 before the Police, in Police Station Taraori, District Karnal (Haryana) alleging that on 16.12.2018, his daughter, had left her house by stating that she was going to meet her maternal grand-father in village Randeva, Saharanpur (UP). However, she did not reach the house of her grandfather and nor did returned back to her own house. On the said complaint the Police registered FIR No.409, dated 18.12.2018 under Section 346 of IPC. On 26.12.2018 supplementary statement of appellant-complainant was recorded by police, stating therein that his minor daughter has been enticed away by accused with the promise of marriage. Thereafter, Sections 363, 366-A of the IPC were added to the FIR.

3. During the course of investigation, daughter of appellant-complainant was recovered by the Police from Indore (MP) on 21.05.2019. Her statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. was got recorded by the police. Finding a prima facie case against the accused, learned trial Court framed charges against him under Sections 363 and 366-A of the IPC.

4. After considering the detailed evidence led by the prosecution and all the relevant material available on record of the case the learned trial Court acquitted the accused.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and have gone through the record of the case minutely.

6. The learned counsel for the appellant while assailing the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned trial Court has argued that the appellant-complainant while appearing as PW-6 had deposed before the learned trial Court that his minor daughter was recovered from the accused-respondent No.2. Being minor she was forcefully kidnapped by the accused. He further argued that (victim) daughter of the appellant-complainant herself, while appearing as PW-2 in the case deposed that besides accused, his brother-in-law, and his elder brother were also involved in her abduction. It is argued that an application seeking further investigation in the case was filed before the learned trial Court, which was subsequently withdrawn by the counsel for the appellant-complainant without his consent. It is submitted that an application under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. was filed before the learned trial Court seeking summoning of additional accused Sandeep, Mohit, and Pooja in the case. But the same was dismissed by the trial Court on 03.04.2023. The order dated 03.04.2023 passed by trial Court was challenged before this Court by filing CRR No.1676 of 2023, but the same was also dismissed on 12.10.2023. It is argued that the trial Court has erred in not considering the age of the minor daughter of appellant and also overlooked the statement of PW-2 wherein, she stated that rape was committed with her by the accused, repeatedly.

7. The principles governing the scope of interference by the High Court in an appeal filed by the State for challenging acquittal of the accused recorded by the trial Court, as laid down by various judgments passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India are as under:

In case of Rajesh Prasad v. State of Bihar, (2022) 3 SCC 471 it is held as under:

“29. After referring to a catena of judgments, this Court culled out the following general principles regarding the powers of the appellate Court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal in the following words:

42. From the above decisions, in our considered view, the following general principles regarding powers of the appellate Court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal emerge:

(1) An appellate Court has full power to review, reappreciate and recons