IMPORTANT POINT
The judgment underscores the necessity of reliable evidence in criminal cases, particularly in serious offenses involving minors, and the implications of acquittal on the prosecution's case.

JUDGMENT :

Ritu Bahri, C.J.

The present Reference has been sent by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge / FTC / Special Judge (POCSO), Dehradun, under Section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for affirmation of the sentence of death awarded by said court against the convict Mohd. Azhar alias Antee and also directed to pay fine of Rs. 20,000 under Section 302 IPC. Aforesaid convict has been further convicted under Section 376 IPC and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO), 2012 (in short, “Act, 2012) and in view of Section 42 of the Act, 2012 he has been sentenced to life imprisonment and also directed to pay fine of Rs. 70,000/- under Section 4 of the Act, 2012, vide judgment and order dated 10/12.12.2018, passed by Additional Sessions Judge / FTC / Special Judge (POCSO), Dehradun, in Special Sessions Trial No. 21 of 2016. Against said order, criminal appeal has also been filed by the convict.

2. Prosecution story, in brief, is that a complaint (Ext. A-1) was made on 02.01.2016, by the brother of the deceased to the In-charge Police Station, Bhandroli, Tehsil- Tuani, District Dehradun, stating therein that on 01.01.2016, the complainant had gone to Kanasar Temple from his home. His cousin went to Kotidhar to buy goods. On his way to Kotidhar, he saw deceased going with Azhar Khan and one other person, so the complainant stopped at Koti Barrier and waiting for that bike but when it did not come till 4-5 pm, he came back home by max. On reaching home when he asked at home about her, it was found that she went somewhere on bike with Azhar Khan and one other person and two other persons sitting on the Scooty followed them. In the evening, when the deceased/victim did not return back, the complainant went out in the morning to search for her. Around 10 am, a dead body was seen hanging from a tree above Rotakhar bend. On looked closely, he found the dead body was of his sister/deceased. He has full doubt that these persons killed his sister and said that these people are vicious. He requested that a legal action will be taken by registering a report against the accused on the basis of his complaint. On the basis of the complaint, an F.I.R was lodged and directed for investigation.

3. Investigation of the case was done by S.I. Kamal Kumar, S.I. Hariom Raj Chauhan and S.I. Dilwar Singh Negi, who took statements of the witnesses, arrested the accused, prepared arrest memos and information memos, inspected the spot of the incident and prepared a map. After completing investigation, chargesheet has been filed against the accused.

4. The charges under Section 376, 302, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 5/6 and 3/4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 were framed against the accused persons. Accused pleaded not guilty and requested for a trial.

5. The prosecution examined the following witnesses:-

6. Statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded, in which, the accused had stated that the prosecution story was wrong and he had been falsely implicated. He further stated that there is a collar bone fracture and his hand does not work, but he did not present any evidence to show that his collar bone had been fractured.

7. P.W.1- Brother of the victim- deceased proved the photo of the dead body of the victim-deceased (Exhibit 1 & 2) and the complaint given in the context of the incident (Exhibit A1). The garland recovered was also proved as Exhibit 3. The bundle of object has been proved as Exhibit 4. The statement of P.W.1 was recorded before t