JUDGMENT :

Sukhvinder Kaur , J .

1. Appellant/ prosecutrix has preferred the instant appeal against judgment dated 27.11.2025, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court (POCSO), Fazilka, vide which respondent No.2-accused Ranjeet Kumar @ Ranjeet Ram has been acquitted.

2. Factual scenario, as unfolded by prosecution is that on 03.07.2022, the prosecutrix/ complainant moved a complaint before the police alleging therein that she was married to 'VK' 12 years ago. Her in- laws family was ploughing land of accused to the extent of 1/5^th share. The prosecutrix and her mother-in-law used to go to the fields for doing work. Even in absence of her mother-in-law, the victim used to go to the fields alone, because her husband was plying some vehicle and often remained out of the house. She alleged that the accused was keeping an evil eye upon her for the last three months. About three months ago, when prosecutrix and her mother-in-law were cutting grass in the fields, accused threw a mobile phone nearby her and asked her to talk to him. The accused extended threats to eliminate her husband and children, due to which the victim picked the phone of accused and started talking to him. About 15 days ago, her mother- in-law had gone to fields and the prosecutrix after preparing tea for her was going towards fields, where accused was sitting in a room in his fields and when she was passing nearby that room, the accused caught hold her hand and took her inside the room and made physical relations with her, against her wish. She raised hue and cry and accused gagged her mouth with his hand and extended threats to her that if she would disclose anything to anyone, he would kill her husband and children. On 02.07.2022 at about 3:00 P.M., when the victim was alone in her house, accused came there under the influence of liquor and started teasing her. She raised hue and cry, due to which he ran away from the spot. When victim went to the fields to bring fodder, her husband also followed her so that she might load the fodder in his vehicle. When victim was cutting fodder, accused came there and tried to make physical relations with her, forcibly. Meanwhile, victim's husband and her brother-in-law reached at the spot and accused abused and gave beatings to her husband, due to which he received many injuries. On the basis of the aforesaid statement, FIR was registered. Her medical examination was also got conducted. The statement of prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was got recorded. Accused was arrested. After completion of investigation and necessary formalities the challan against the accused was presented before the Court for commencement of trial.

3. After finding a prima facie case against the accused, he was charge-sheeted for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 354, 450, 506 and 325 IPC, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

4. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined PW1 Victim/ complainant, PW2 Victim's Husband 'VK', PW3 Victim's mother-in- law 'SD', PW4 ASI Dalip Singh, PW5 LC Mamta Rani, PW6 Dr. Sandeep Kumar, PW7 Dr. Kavita Devi, PW8 SC Rakesh Kumar, PW9 ASI Sukhpal Singh, PW10 Bhagirath, PW11 SC Gurpreet Singh, PW12 Hc Amritpal Kaur, PW13 SC Harjinder Singh, PW14 SC Komal, PW15 Sonu Singh, Radiographer, Civil Hospital, Fazilka and PW16 SC Jashanpreet Singh.

5. Statement of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded in which, all incriminating evidence was put to him, which he denied and pleaded innocence and false implication. However, no defence evidence was led by the accused.

6. After considering the evidence on record, learned trial Court found the same to be woefully insufficient to convict the accused who was accordingly acquitted of the offences for which he had been charge-sheeted, vide impugned judgment dated 27.11.2025.

7. Aggrieved of the said decision, present appeal has been filed by the appellant challenging acquittal of the accused/ respondent No.2.

8. Learned couns