PUJA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant criminal appeal has been filed under Section 14 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the order dated 24.06.2019 passed by the learned Special Judge, POCSO Cases, Churu in Case NO. 108/2018 whereby, he closed the evidence of prosecution.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a FIR was registered under Section 451, 354, 323/34 IPC and Section 3(1) (11) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act at the instance of complainant petitioner. The police after investigation filed chargesheet against accused persons. On 21.02.2017, the learned Additional District Judge, Churu framed charges against the accused persons and matter proceeded for evidence of prosecution witnesses. It is argued that on 16.05.2019, the learned Special Judge summoned witness No.10 Investigating officer by bailable warrant and on 24.05.2019, the learned Special Judge granted last opportunity to produce prosecution witness No.10 while issuing bailable warrant in the sum of Rs.2000/-. However, the witness No.10 who is investigating officer did not appear and vide order dated 24.06.2019, the learned court below closed the evidence of prosecution. Therefore, for just decision of the case, the witness No.10 who is a material witness should be summoned and examined before the Court.

(3.) Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor supported the impugned order. It is contended that all possible steps were taken by the learned trial Court to procure the attendance of the investigating officer and since all the attempts failed, the Court decided to dispense with the examination of the investigating officer and closed the prosecution case.