IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

217 CRM-A-1115-2024 Date of decision: 08.09.2025 State of Punjab .....Applicant/Appellant Versus Gagandeep Singh .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. GREWAL Present : Mr. Amit Rana, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

****

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J.

1. The present leave to appeal is directed against the judgement dated 22.11.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court, Patiala, whereby the respondent- accused, Gagandeep Singh was acquitted of the charges framed against him under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the IPC and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as 'POCSO Act'), in case FIR No.28 dated 07.02.2022 under Sections 363, 366-A and 376 of the IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act. The State of Punjab seeks setting aside of the acquittal and conviction of the respondent.

Prosecution Case

2. The prosecution case, briefly stated, is that on 07.02.2022 Feroze Khan lodged a complaint alleging that his minor daughter, aged about 16 years and studying in class 9th at Aggarsain International Public School, Samana had gone to the bank but did not return home. He suspected that the respondent-accused, who had allegedly been harassing her on the pretext of marriage, had enticed her away from his lawful guardianship.

3. On the basis of this complaint, FIR No.28 dated

07.02.2022 was registered under Sections 363, 366-A and 376 of the IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act, at Police Station City Samana, District Patiala.

4. About a month later, the victim/prosecutrix was traced at Ferozepur along with the accused. She was restored to her father's custody and a statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. was recorded. In that statement, she alleged that she had resided with the accused for more than a month and had physical relations with him during this period. She was medically examined and forensic analysis confirmed the presence of male DNA matching that of the accused.

5. Upon completion of investigation, chargesheet was filed under Sections 363, 366-A, 376 of the IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

6. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined 10 witnesses, including the prosecutrix, who deposed as PW-1. She initially supported the prosecution version and affirmed her date of birth as 24.06.2006. PW-2 Feroze Khan corroborated his complaint. PW-5, the Principal of Aggarsen International Public School, produced the admission register, admission form, and a copy of the birth certificate of the prosecutor reflecting her date of birth as 24.06.2006. PW-6, Dr.Gurmandeep Kaur, who conducted the medical examination, proved the MLR (Ex.PW6/3), and deposed that the CFSL report (Ex.PW6/5) confirmed that the DNA recovered from the prosecutrix matched that of the respondent. SI Navdeep Kaur (PW-4), the investigating officer, narrated the investigation and the recovery process.

7. The learned Trial Court, however, noticed material infirmities. In her cross-examination, the prosecutrix admitted that she had voluntarily accompanied the accused to marry him and further deposed that she was in fact 19 years of age. She also stated that her father had deliberately reduced her age by three years at the time of her school admission.

8. The grandmother of the prosecutrix, who appeared as PW-

7, turned hostile and did not support the case of the prosecution. Similarly, Feroze Khan (PW-2), in his cross-examination, also admitted to manipulating the age of his daughter in the school records.

9. The medical examination revealed that the hymen was intact and no external or internal injuries were found on the person of the prosecutrix.

10. On the strength of these facts, the learned Trial Court concluded that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and acquitted the respondent.

Submissions on Behalf of the State

11. Learned State counsel has assailed the acquittal of the respo