FEROZ AHMED KHAN Vs. STATE THROUGH AAG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Pw-1 Manzoor Ahmed Khan lodges a written complaint on 14. 5. 2010 with Police Post, Hajam that his son Mr. X ( name withheld ) aged 8 years was taken by the petitioner to his house where he committed an unnatural act with him. It also alleges in the complaint that due to unnatural act committed by the petitioner, the blood is oozing from the anus of his son and that his son is also feeling pain. Based upon the aforesaid complaint, the Police Station, Sumbal registers a formal FIR and investigation is set in motion. The investigation is conducted by PW-6 ASI, Abdul Aziz. During the investigation, the Investigating Officer inspects the scene of crime , prepares the site plan , gets the victim medically examined through PW-5 Dr. Ishtiyaq Ahmed Naikoo and also records the statement of prosecution witnesses who claim to be acquainted with the facts of the case. The accused is also taken into custody on 26. 5. 2002 and is subsequently released on bail by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sopore on 10. 6. 2002.

(2.) The Investigating Officer concludes that the involvement of the petitioner in commission of crime punishable under Section 377 Cr PC is prima facie established and, therefore, sends the accused to face the trial before the competent Court of law. This is how, the challan is presented in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sumbal on 9. 10. 200

(3.) The Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sumbal (( hereinafter referred to as the Trial Court ) frames the charges against the petitioner for commission of offence under Section 377 Cr PC on 6. 11. 2003 . Since the petitioner pleads not guilty and claims to be tried, the prosecution is directed to lead the evidence to prove its case. With a view to prove its case, the prosecution examines five witnesses i. e. PW-1 Manzoor Ahmed Khan (father of the victim), PW-2 (victim himself ), PW-3 Mst Shakeela Begum (mother of the victim), PW-4 Ghulam Mohi-ud- Din ( a neighbourer) and PW-5 Dr. Ishtiyaq Ahmed Naikoo ( expert witness ). On the closure of prosecution evidence, the incriminating circumstances appearing against the petitioner are put to him and his statement under Section 342 Cr PC is recorded. The petitioner in his statement counters the incriminating circumstances by submitting that all the prosecution witnesses recorded, are relatives of the victim and therefore, they have made wrong statements against him. He, however, chooses to lead evidence in defence. The petitioner examines the defence witnesses i. e. DW-1 Ghulam Nabi Hajam and DW-2 Ghulam Ahmed Khan.