S.VENU Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has been arrayed as the sole accused in the instant Crime No.1238/2019 of Alappuzha North Police Station, which has been registered for offences punishable under Sections 354A of the IPC and Sections 9(f) , 9(m) and 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, on the basis of the First Information Statement given by the mother of the minor victim girl, aged 11 years on 23.7.2019 at about 8 p.m in respect of the alleged incidents, which had happened for the period from 1.6.2019 to 4.7.2019.

(2.) The prosecution case in short is that the petitioner is a Sanskrit Teacher in the school where the minor victim girl, aged 11 years is studying and the mother of the minor victim girl has given the F.I.Statement in this crime on 23.7.2019 that the petitioner used to frequently made her sit in his lap and used to harassed her by touching her buttocks etc. on quite a few occasions and based on this, the above said crime has been registered.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that the above said allegations are false and fabricated and further that the above said versions in the F.I. Statement are given by the mother of the victim girl, which has been treated as the F.I. Statement, whereas the minor victim girl herself has given Section 164 of Cr.P.C. statement, which has been recorded by the learned Magistrate, wherein she has no case that the petitioner has made her to sit on his lap or that he used to harass her by touching her buttocks etc. and that her allegation is that the petitioner used to touch her shoulders and on the lower portion of her leg etc. and that the above said variances itself would make it clear that the credibility and believability of the versions of the prosecution is extinct. Further that going by nature of the allegations made by the minor victim girl in her Section 164 of Cr.P. C. Statement, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary for the fair and smooth conduct of the investigation in this crime. Further, the petitioner would point out that the above said false allegations have been made at the instigation of the Manager of the school where the petitioner is teaching and that the Manager has taken various steps to victimize the petitioner and he used to spread false rumours that the petitioner has been harassing by touching girl students in the school and that thereupon the petitioner was forced to send Annexure-B lawyer's notice to the Manager of the school to desist from doing so, to which the Manager had sent Annexure-C reply notice and later the petitioner had no other alternative, but to file Annexure-D private criminal complaint before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Alapppuzha alleging that the Manager has committed the offence as per Section 500 of IPC (Criminal defamation).