IMPORTANT POINT
The presumption of innocence remains paramount, and the prosecution must provide credible evidence to support charges, which was lacking in this case.

JUDGMENT :

PANKAJ PUROHIT, J.

Delay Condonation Application (IA/1/2024)

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties on Delay Condonation Application.

2. As per office report, there is a delay of 62 days in filing the Government Appeal as well as Leave to Appeal Application. Being satisfied with the reasons, so furnished, we allow the delay condonation application. The delay of 62 days, in filing the Government Appeal, is condoned.

Special Leave to Appeal No. 261 of 2024

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties on Leave to Appeal Application.

4. This government appeal along with leave to appeal application has been preferred by the State/appellant challenging the judgment and order dated 10.01.2024 passed by learned Special Sessions Judge/Juvenile Judge, Pithoragarh in Special Sessions Trial No. 52 of 2021 State Vs. A-Juvenile-In-Conflict with Law, whereby, the said court has acquitted the respondent Juvenile for the charge of offence, punishable under Section 363, 366 and 376(2) of IPC as well as Section 5/6 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences, 2012 (hereinafter referred to The POCSO Act).

5. Facts of the case, in nutshell, are that the informant of the case lodged a report with Revenue Sub Inspector Digtoli, District Pithoragarh on 13.07.2021 with the averment that his grand-daughter has gone missing from 12.07.2021 at 10:00 a.m. from village Naini; age of his grand-daughter is 15 years; even after making plenty of efforts, his grand-daughter was not traceable. Hence, it was requested that report be lodged and his grand-daughter may be searched.

6. During the course of investigation, on the information of informant, Investigating Officer recovered the victim and prepared the site plan of the place of recovery of victim and her statements were recorded, even her medical examination was conducted. On transfer of investigation to regular Police, the Investigating Officer after recording the statements of the victim and that of other witnesses and also on the pointing out of victim, inspected place of occurrence and prepared the site plan. On completion of investigation, chalai report was submitted against respondent-Juvenile for the offence punishable under Section 363, 366, 376(2)(i) of IPC as well as under Section 5/6 of POCSO Act before the Juvenile Justice Board, Pithoragarh. Charges were accordingly, framed against the respondents.

7. The prosecution examined as many as ten witnesses, i.e. PW-1 victim, PW-2 grand-father of victim, PW-3 mother of victim, PW-4 father of victim, PW-5 Girish Chandra Pandey, PW-6 Dr. Divya Nath, PW-7 Digamber Singh, PW-8 Basanti Meher, PW-9 Head Constable 146 C.P. Chattar Singh and PW-10 S.I. Priyanka Moni, before the learned trial court to prove its case against the respondent/accused and documentary evidences were also produced. Subsequent thereto, statement of respondent-Juvenile was recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. in which he merely pleaded that I am innocent and falsely implicated in the crime. Further, he denied to give any evidence in defence. The court below at the end of trial, has acquitted the respondent-Juvenile, as mentioned hereinabove. Hence, State has come up in appeal before this Court alongwith application, seeking leave to file appeal.

8. The points, on which, the trial court recorded the respondent-Juvenile, can be summarized, as follows:

“(i) The trial court found contradiction in the statement of victim in paragraph nos.11 and 14 of the cross examination.

(ii) The trial court also noticed that there was no veracity in the statement of victim given to the Medical Officer as in comparison to one given to the Magistrate, under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., which she stated to have been given under coercion to the police. Even in paragraph 18 of her cross-examination, the victim went on to state that even A-Juvenile-In-Conflict with Law, did not establish any physical relation with her. There was a friendship between her and that of the accused since they belong to same village. The