HANSABEN RAMABHAI DHANABHAI PARMAR Vs. TEJABHAI KALABHAI DAMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been filed under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the appellant - original complainant - Hansaben Ramaben Dhanabhai Parmar, challenging the legality and validity of the judgement and order of acquittal dated 26th October, 2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge (POCSO Act), Banaskantha at Palanpur, (hereinafter referred to as the Special Court), in the Special (POCSO) Case No.17 of 2018, whereby, the Special Court has acquitted the respondent No.1 - original accused from the charges levelled against him under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 4, 6 and 18 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

(2.) As per the case of the prosecution before the Special Court, the victim, at the time of incident in question, was less than 18 years and the respondent - accused, on 06.03.2018, at about 9.00 a.m. had kidnapped the victim with a view to commit rape on her and had kept her in his custody till 09.03.2018. The complaint was lodged by the present appellant, who happens to be the mother of the victim, which was registered at Palanpur Taluka Police Station, District Banaskantha. The Investigating Officer after collecting sufficient evidence against the respondent - accused had filed the charge-sheet before the Special (POCSO) Court at Palanpur, where it was registered as Special (POCSO) Case No.17 of 2018. The Special Court after appreciating the evidence produced by the prosecution has acquitted the respondent - accused from the charges levelled against him by the impugned judgement and order. Being aggrieved by the same, the present appeal has been filed.

(3.) It is sought to be submitted by Ms. Kiran D. Pandey, learned advocate for the appellant, that the victim, who happens to be the daughter of the appellant, was less than 18 years as per school leaving certificate and other documents produced by the prosecution, and the respondent - accused having kidnapped the victim and having committed sexual intercourse with her against her wish, the prosecution had proved the charges levelled against him. Ms. Pandey, learned advocate for the appellant further submitted that the respondent being very head-strong person, the witnesses including the victim had turned hostile at the time of trial before the Special Court and that the Investigating Officer also had not carried out appropriate investigation, which has resulted into the acquittal.