IBRAHIM Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has been arrayed as the sole accused in the instant Crime No.373/2019 of Perinthalmanna Police Station, Malappuram District, in which the offences alleged state those punishable under Sec.363A of the I.P.C and Sec.6 r/w Sec.5(l) of the POCSO Act. The abovesaid Crime was initially registered under Sec.57 of the Kerala Police Act as a person missing case on account of the "missing" of the minor victim girl involved in this case pursuant to the FI statement lodged by her mother on 8.7.2019. The Police after investigation has traced out the minor victim girl in the company of the petitioner-accused and thereafter they have altered the offence as mentioned above and the petitioner herein has been arrayed as the sole accused in the said crime. The petitioner has been arrested in this case on 30.11.2019 and after his remand, he is under detention since then.

(2.) The brief of the prosecution case is that the minor victim girl's date of birth in this case is 27.5.2002 and that she would complete the majority age of 18 years on 27.5.2020 and the minor victim is a close relative of the petitioner/accused, aged 23 years, and that she had gone along with the petitioner from her house on 24.6.2019. The girl's mother had given the complaint as per FI statement only on 8.7.2019, pursuant to which the FIR has been registered in the instant crime. In the statement given by the girl she had stated that she had voluntarily gone along with the petitioner on 24.6.2019 and thereafter they had travelled to various places and stayed in various locations for the period till 30.11.2019 and on none of these occasions the petitioner had not committed any act of sexual incidents with her nor even touched her body except holding her hand once or twice. In the statement she had also stated that she had voluntarily gone with the petitioner only on account of her love with him and that no sexual incidents had happened.

(3.) The learned Prosecutor would point out that the minor victim was subjected to medical examination and the medical examination report given by the Doctor reveals that the hymen of the minor victim was torn but that the minor victim has not stated to the Doctor that she had sexual intercourse with the petitioner at any point of time.