The court emphasized that failure to support the prosecution does not equate to false testimony, protecting victims from unjust accusations.

1. The challenge in this appeal is to clause (vi) of the operative portion of the judgment and order dated 22/04/2022 passed by learned Extra Joint Additional Sessions Judge, Pune in Special Case (POCSO) No. 155 of 2017 and consequently, to quash and set aside the Regular Criminal Case No. 2323 of 2022 pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shivajinagar, Pune.

2. The appellant is the father of the minor victim girl. The accused faced trial in the special case before the POCSO Court for the offences punishable under S.354A, S.324 w / 34, 323 r/w 34, 427 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (" IPC ", for short) and under S.8 and S.12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ("POCSO Act", for short). The FIR came to be lodged by the complainant with Bharti Vidyapith Police Station, Pune. It is alleged that on 09/01/2017 at about 8.00 a.m., her daughter i.e. the victim had been to school. When she came back home, the victim was in a frightened condition. The victim informed that the accused had committed acts against her which is an offence punishable under the aforesaid sections. On being questioned by the complainant, the accused assaulted the complainant and the appellant herein.

3. The charge was framed against two accused for the offence punishable under S.354A, S.324 r/w 34, 323 r/w 34, 427 r/w 34 and under S.8 & S.12 of POCSO Act. The prosecution examined 6 witnesses. The appellant was examined as PW.4. The trial Court framed the following issues and rendered the findings as under:

4. The trial Court for the reasons mentioned in the judgment and order, acquitted the accused; however, in the operative portion of the order at clause (vi) it is observed thus :
"vi) PW - 4 resident of has given false evidence in the Court, and compelling victim to depose falsely in the Court, hence, the Office Superintendent of the District and Sessions Court, Pune is hereby directed to lodge complaint against him for offence punishable under S.193 of the Indian Penal Code within two months from the date of this order and judgment."

5. It is pertinent to mention that the appellant had preferred a Criminal Writ Petition No. 2211 of 2022 in this Court challenging clause (vi) of the operative order referred hereinabove. In the meantime, clause (vi) was acted upon and complaint came to be filed before the Judicial Magistrate First Class for prosecuting the appellant. The present appeal was therefore filed under S.341 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("CrPC", for short). So far as Criminal Writ Petition No. 2211 of 2022 is concerned, the same was disposed of on 05/09/2022 with liberty to invoke appropriate remedy under the law challenging the impugned proceedings.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned APP for the State.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the trial Court was in error in directing that the complaint should be lodged against the appellant for the offence punishable under S.193 of IPC . In the submission of the learned counsel the preliminary inquiry that is contemplated by S.340 of CrPC was not conducted. Further it is submitted that the victim and her family having faced the trauma of the assault, the victim's father i.e. the appellant is being unnecessarily subjected to further mental trauma even after the conclusion of the trial. It is submitted that the appellant has suffered enough.

8. Learned APP on the other hand supported the order passed by the trial Court. My attention is invited to the findings recorded by the trial Court to submit that the trial Court after elaborately considering the evidence has come to a definite conclusion that the appellant has not only deposed fa