news details |
|
|
| Court acquits rape accused | | | early times report
Jammu, Feb 1 (JNF): Principal Sessions Judge Samba Kartar Singh acquitted a rape accused as the prosecution couldn't establish the case
According to the police on June 8, 2009 prosecutrix was with her cattle in a jungle and the accused Fiaz Ali son of Beeru called her to help in extracting his goat. When she reached near him, he caught hold of her and forcibly took her to jungle where he allegedly raped her.
After allegedly raping her, the accused threatened her that he would murder her in case she disclosed the incident to anybody. Thereafter she came home and did not disclose to anybody because of fear of accused. On June 30, 2009 her father came home and she narrated the whole incident to her mother who narrated the same to her father. On the written report of the complainant dated 2.7.2009 the FIR No. 56/2009 for the commission of offence falling under section 376 RPC was registered against the accused. After the investigation the final report was submitted in the court. The court after hearing Public Prosecutor and Advocate Rajeev Sharma appearing for the accused, observed that the statement of the prosecutrix is not trustworthy because she remained silent for a pretty long time and did not disclose about the incident to anybody for long time.
"Similarly the statement of her father and mother cannot be believed also. Had she narrated the incident immediately after the occurrence to her mother, this fact would have been admissible in evidence under section 8 of the Evidence Act but she and her mother remained silent for a pretty long time and in such a situation the corroboration of her statement is necessary. The corroboration of her statement becomes further necessary when the statement of her uncle Mohammad Hamid is perused. He has deposed that when he saw the prosecutrix weeping, he enquired from her as to what had happened but she remained silent and when on 8.6.2009 he went to her house, her mother told him that she had been raped by the accused," the court said.
The court observed that statement of the witness makes it clear that family members of the prosecutrix were well aware of the incident immediately after it happened but they did not lodge the report. "In such a situation the solitary statement of the prosecutrix cannot be believed. Hamid is elder brother of the father of the prosecutrix and he has deposed that FIR was lodged four days after the occurrence which is not true. He has further rendered the prosecution story doubtful by stating that he cannot say as to for how many days the talk between the accused and his brother continued regarding compromise and had the accused compromised the matter, no one would have gone to the Police Station for lodging the FIR. This fact is also corroborated by Sharifa Bibi who has stated that her husband lodged the FIR after consulting his brother. This also goes to prove that there is no truth in the incident and FIR was lodged after thorough deliberation and consultation," the court observed.
The court questioned that had the accused entered into compromise with the father of the complainant, he would have never lodged the FIR. In view of such material contradictions in the prosecution story, the solitary statement of the prosecutrix cannot be believed without corroboration which is totally lacking in this case. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
