Back
2025 Supreme(Telangana) 276
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K.SURENDER, E.V.VENUGOPAL, JJ.
The State of Telangana - Appellant
Versus
Faiyaz Mehmood Ansari and another - Respondent
Criminal Appeal Nos.363, 429, 478 of 2020 & 146 Of 2021
Decided On : 01-05-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : MD FASIUDDIN
For the Respondent: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR TG
The absence of injuries on private parts does not negate the occurrence of sexual offences; the victim's consistent testimony is crucial for conviction.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 120
(B), 307, 326, 341, 342, 506, 377 - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Sections 6, 7 - Drugs and Magic Remedies Act, 1954 - Section 2(c), 7 - Juvenile Justice Act - Conviction of accused for inflicting injuries on minor victim, including sexual offences, upheld with modifications to sentences. (Paras 9, 34, 35)
(B) Criminal Conspiracy - To establish criminal conspiracy, there must be an agreement to commit an illegal act; mere infliction of injuries does not suffice. (Para 27)
(C) Evidence - Consistency and credibility of victim's testimony are crucial; absence of injuries on private parts does not negate the occurrence of sexual offences. (Paras 26, 34)
Facts of the case:
The appeals arise from convictions related to the abuse and injuries inflicted on a minor victim by the accused, including allegations of sexual assault and physical harm. The victim's father reported the incidents after observing injuries and inappropriate behavior by the accused.
Findings of Court:
The court upheld the convictions for sexual offences and physical harm, modifying sentences for certain charges while dismissing appeals from the complainant and the State.
Issues: The main issues included the credibility of the victim's testimony, the nature of the injuries, and the existence of a criminal conspiracy.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of the victim's consistent testimony and clarified that the absence of specific injuries does not undermine the credibility of allegations of sexual offences.
Result: Appeals partly allowed; convictions upheld with modified sentences.
JUDGMENT :
K.SURENDER, J.
1. Criminal Appeal 363 of 2020 is filed by Accused No.2. Criminal Appeal No.478 of 2020 is filed by A1. Criminal Appeal 429 of 2020 is filed by the defacto Complainant/PW.1. Criminal Appeal 146 of 2021 is filed by the State.
2. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants, the complainant and also learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, Sri M.Vivekananda Reddy, representing the State.
3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that PW.1 is the defacto complainant, who is the father of the victim boy-PW.2. PW.1 married Accused No.2 in the year 2006 and had three children. Both PW.1 and A2 went to Kuwait, where all three children were born. They stayed in Kuwait until 2013, and during the year 2013, PW.1 sent back Accused No.2 and all the three children to India, where they were living separately in Khilwat area in a rented premises. Thereafter, they shifted to Shaheen Nagar area. Both areas are in Hyderabad.
4. On 09.09.2016, PW.1 called Accused No.2 and informed her that he was coming to India. On 11.09.2016, PW.1 came to India and celebrated Bakrid festival in his parents house. On 18.09.2016, PW.1 asked Accused No.2 to take back the children to their rented premises in Shaheen Nagar, since their exams were starting on 22.09.2016. PW.2 was found shivering and weeping. He requested PW.1 not to send him with Accused No.2.
5. PW.1 questioned the boy (PW.2) about his behavior. PW.2 informed PW.1 that A2, with the help of A1 (a thantrik), inflicted several injuries on his body. PW.1 found several injuries on PW.2’s buttocks and other parts of his body. PW.2 did not allow PW.1 to check his anus and was suffering from pain. PW.2 also informed PW.1 that the entire activity of inflicting injuries, cutting him with blades, and pouring hot water on him was photographed on a cell phone. Accused No.2 left the house, and on further enquiry,PW.2disclosed that Accused No.1 used to come to their house and that A1 and A2 were having illicit intimacy. PW.2 informed PW.1 that A2 also threatened the children whenever A1 came to the house.
6. PW.1 then went to the Police and lodged an English-typed complaint on 26.09.2016. The Police registered the case under Sections 120 (B), 307, 341, 342, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code , Sections 4, 6, and 10 of the POCSO Act, Sections 2 (C) and 7 of the Drugs and Magic Remedies Act, 1954 (for short “the Act”),and Section 23 of the Juvenile Justice Act .
7. During the course of investigation, PW.2 was taken to PW.7- Doctor. PW.7 examined PW.2 on 27.09.2016 and found the following injuries:
i) Injury on the left big toe
ii) Injury on the right big toe
iii) Blade marks all over the body.
8. According to PW.7, the injuries were caused with a blade. During the course of investigation, Ex.P6-the bonafide certificate of PW.2 was collected from PW.4. Ex.P3-photographs and Ex.P4- CD/DVD showing the injuries caused to the boy/PW.2 were video- graphed.
9. During the course of trial, the learned Sessions Judge examined PWs.1 to 11 and marked Exs.P1 to P21 and MOs.1 to 7. The learned Sessions Judge found Accused Nos.1 and 2 guilty of the following offences:
| Conviction for the offence under Section | Punishment | |
| Accused No.1 | Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. | Rigorous Life Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-. |
| Section 377 of Indian Penal Code. | Rigorous Life Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-. | |
| Section 307 of Indian Penal Code. | Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of Ten Years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- | |
| Section 342 of Indian Penal Code. | Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-. | |
| Section 497 of Indian Penal Code | Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-. | |
| Section 506 of Indian penal Code | Rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.4,000/-. | |
| Accused No.2 | Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code | Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of Ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/- |
| S | ||
