The main legal point established in the judgment is that the allegations made against the accused only prima-facie fulfilled the ingredients of the offence defined under Section 7 of the POCSO Act, and there were no allegations that could bring the case under Section 3 of the Act.

JUDGMENT :

PANKAJ PUROHIT, J.

1. The instant appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 03.08.2022, passed by the learned Judge Fast Track Special Court/Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dehradun in Special Sessions Trial No. 140 of 2019, State of Uttarakhand vs. Kamal Singh Bisht, whereby an application Paper No. 95-B moved by the appellant-victim for framing charge under Section 376 IPC and Section 4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, (for short “the POCSO Act”) against the applicant, was rejected.

2. An F.I.R. was lodged against the private respondent by mother of the appellant-Prabha Devi in Police Station Mussoorie No. 0018 of 2019 dated 21.06.2019 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 354-A, 307 and 107 IPC and 7/8 of the POCSO Act and 3 (1) (x) (xi) Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, (for short “S.C. and S.T. Act”)

3. As per the F.I.R. lodged by mother of the appellant, the minor daughter of the informant, victim aged about 17 years was called over telephone by Kamal Singh Bisht on 20.06.2019 at about 05:00 P.M. to come to Hathipaon near Mussoorie by-pass road to meet his friend-Pooja Jagwan; Kamal Singh Bisht is a resident of nearby village of the informant and the victim was well acquainted with him. It is stated that due to acquaintance, she went to meet him; on reaching there the victim found Pooja Jagwan and Kamal Singh Bisht standing near a bike and Kamal Singh Bisht introduced Pooja Jagwan to the victim and took the victim near a bush, below the road saying that he want to converse something important with her.

4. It is alleged that there Kamal Singh Bisht asked the victim to make relations with him and on protesting, he mis-behaved with the victim and started touching her private parts. At this the victim warned Kamal Singh Bisht to face legal consequences; infuriated by it, Kamal Singh Bisht slapped victim on her cheek and shut her mouth and started tearing her clothes. He threatened the victim and her family members with life; threatened her to have sexual relations with him and grabbed her neck, due to which she got frightened and ran-away from there and somehow managed to come back on to the road. Kamal Singh Bisht chased her and abused her with derogatory words “neech doomri” saying that he would not allow her to go from there alive, but victim did not submit to his demand and threatened him with legal actions. Both Kamal Singh Bisht and Pooja Jagwan were using caste coloured remarks upon her and she was abeting Kamal to commit maarpeet with her. According to the informant at about 09:00 P.M. she received a call from Police Station Kempty, Mussoorie that her daughter-victim was lying unconscious in a secluded barren field near Kempty petrol pump and they had taken victim to St. Mary Hospital, Mussoorie and from there to Doon Hospital, Dehradun. The victim regained her senses on 21.06.2019 at about 06:00 A.M. in the Hospital and narrated the entire story to the informant. According to the informant, it is alleged that the victim was not recollecting anything, after she fell unconscious, at the place of occurrence at Mussoorie. The informant with these allegations suspected that Kamal Singh Bisht might have committed rape upon her; being a member of general caste, while the informant is a poor woman belonging to schedule caste.

5. On this F.I.R. investigation ensued and a chargesheet was submitted against respondent no. 2 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 354-A, 307 IPC and 7/8 of the POCSO Act 3(1) (R), 3 (1) (s), 3 (1) (w) of the S.C. and S.T. Act vide charge-sheet no. 19 of 2019 dated 20.08.2019. The learned Judge Fast Track Special Court/Additional District and Sessions Judge, POCSO, Dehradun took cognizance and summoned the accused to face the trial.

6. It is reflected from the record that on 07.01.2020, after hearing the learned counsel for the accused, the trial court framed charges against the respondent under Sections 354-A, 323, 504,