1
IN THE COURT OF THE ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE :: ADONI
PRESENT:- SRI M.A.SOMASEKHAR
ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE, ADONI.
THURSDAY, THE 22 ND DAY OF APRIL, 2021
SESSIONS CASE NO.91/2014
TABULAR STATEMENT APPENDED TO THE JUDGMENT
Name of the Police Station: Adoni I Town Police Station
Crime No.: 115/2010
Sessions Case No.: 91/2014
Name of the accused :
1. * M. Samiullah @ Sameer S/o Mullavali, Aged 20 years, Muslim, Business, Kummarigeri,Adoni Town.
2. **Syed Jameer S/o Syed Vali,aged 25 yrs., Muslim, Driver, H.No.3/11, Kharibowdi Street, Adoni.
3. Gani Basha S/o Mabu Sahib,aged 38 years, Muslim, Cooly, r/o Kharibowdi Street, Adoni.
4. Reshma W/o Gani Basha, aged 32 years, Muslim, Housewife,r/o Kharibowdi Street, Adoni.
Date of Offence: 10-05-2010
Date of Complaint: 14-05-2010
Date of release on bail : 03-06-2010
Date of Committal: 04-03-2013
Date of Commencement of trial: 23-08-2021
Date of Close of trial: 17-09-2021
Date of Sentence or Order: 22-09-2021
Explanation for delay if any : Vide diary extract of the committal court
In the Court of Sessions: - On appearance of accused charges framed on
18-3-2020. The Prosecution evidence commenced on 23-08-2021 and closed on 17-09-2021. Sec.313 Cr.P.C. examination is conducted on 20-09-2021.
In the result, Accused A.3 and A.4 are found not guilty for the charge u/Sec.366-A and 109 of IPC and they are acquitted u/Sec.235 (1) 2
Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of Accused shall be in force for a period of six months as required u/Sec. 437-A of Cr.P.C. MO.1 to MO.6 shall be dealt as per the outcome of the case pending against A.1 before Juvenile Justice Board,
Kurnool.
Assistant Sessions Judge,
Adoni.
Copy submitted to:-
The Registrar (Judl) High Court of A.P., Nelapadu, Guntur. The Director of Prosecution, A.P., Vijayawada. The District Judge, Kurnool. Copy to the District Collector, Kurnool. Copy to the Superintendent of Police, Kurnool. Copy to the J.M.F.C. Adoni.
3
IN THE COURT OF THE ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE :: ADONI
PRESENT:- SRI M.A.SOMASEKHAR
ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE, ADONI.
WEDNESDAY, THE 22 ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021
SESSIONS CASE NO.91/2014
Name of the accused :
1. * M. Samiullah @ Sameer S/o Mullavali, Aged 20 years, Muslim, Business, Kummarigeri,Adoni Town.
2. **Syed Jameer S/o Syed Vali,aged 25 yrs., Muslim, Driver, H.No.3/11, Kharibowdi Street, Adoni.
3.Gani Basha S/o Mabu Sahib,aged 38 years, Muslim, Cooly, r/o Kharibowdi Street, Adoni.
4. Reshma W/o Gani Basha, aged 32 years, Muslim, Housewife,r/o Kharibowdi Street, Adoni. …A1 to A4
*A.1 is juvenile and directed to file separate charge sheet before the
Juvenile Justice Board, Kurnool. **Case against is A.2 is abated as he died.
Finding of the Judge: Accused A.3 and A.4 are found not guilty.
Sentence or Order In the result, the A3 and A4 are found not guilty for the charges u/Secs. 366-A, 109 of IPC and they are acquitted u/Sec.235 (1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of A3 and A4 shall be in force for a period of six months as required U/Sec. 437-A of Cr.P.C.
MO.1 to MO.6 , if any, shall be dealt as per the outcome of the case against A.1
before Juvenile Justice Board, Kurnool.
: ADONI I TOWN POLICE STATION
Crime No.: Cr.No.115/2010 4
This case is coming before me for final hearing on 21-9-2021 in the presence of Addl. Public Prosecutor on behalf of prosecution and of Sri.
G.C.Ranganna, Advocate for the accused No.3 and 4 and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court delivered the following.
JUDGMENT
The Inspector of Police, Adoni Town Circle filed charge sheet against the accused in Cr.No.115/2010 for the offence punishable u/Sec. 366 (A), 109,376 r/w 34 of IPC of Adoni I Town Police Station.
02. In State of Punjab Vs. Gurmit Singh and others in 1996 (2) SCC 384 wherein it is held that victims of sexual abuse or assault need to be treated with sensitivity during the investigation and trial and that trial of rape cases should be generally held in camera. Further held the Courts should, as far as possible, avoid disclosing the name of the prosecutrix in their orders to save further embarrassment to the victim of sex crime. The anonymity of the victim of the crime must be maintained as far as possible throughout. Not only in this case but also in another case held by Apex Court reported in Bhupinder Sharma Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh in 2003(8) SCC 551 in which while referring to Sec.228-A IPC the Hon’ble
Apex Court held that Sec.228-A of IPC makes disclosure of the identity of victim of certain offences which includes Sec.376, 376-A, 376-B, 376-C or 376-D is alleged or found to have been committed can be punished. Apart from the above Judgment in another Judgment of Supreme Court in 2019(2)
SCC 703 in Nipun Saxena Vs. Union of India in which it is held in
Judgment of all Courts the name of the victim should not be indicated.
03.From the above noted Judgments in Supreme Court, it is clear that all courts are bound to avoid disclosure of name of the raped victim in the court proceedings as well as in their Judgments. Thus in view of the above pronouncement of the Apex Court, the name of the victim is avoided and wherever the victim is to be mentioned ‘prosecutrix’ will be mentioned.
5 02. The brief averments of the charge sheet are as follows:
(a) The prosecutrix is minor victim girl, aged about 17 years left the house on 10-5-2010 at 1 P.M., saying that she will go to Market and did not return to house. The father of the victim, viz., PW.1 suspected upon A.1 for kidnapping the prosecutrix. Upon the report of PW.1, initially, PW.10 PSV
Ramkishore, the then Sub-Inspector of Police, I Town P.S., registered a case in Cr.No.115/2010 U/S Girl missing of Adoni I Town P.S., on 14-5-2010 at 7
P.M., and investigated into.
(b) During the course of investigation, on 16-5-2010, PW.10 examined
PW.2, who revealed that on 10-5-2020 while he was going to Kurnool, he found the missing girl (Prosecutrix) was in the company of A.1 to A.4. Upon which, PW.10 arrested A.2 on 17-5-2010 at 6.15 P.M., in the presence of panchayatdars PW.5 and PW.6. A.2 revealed that A.1, A3 and A.4 along with him kidnapped the victim girl. A.2 was remanded to judicial custody.
© PW.10 altered Section of law to 366(A),109 r/w 34 IPC from Girl missing case. On 29-5-2010 at 5 P.M., A.1 and victim girl were present infront of APSRTC Bus-stand, Adoni. On information, PW.10 arrested A.1, who confessed about committing rape on victim girl at Raichur. PW.10 again altered the Section of law from 366(A), 109 r/w 34 IPC to Sec.366(A), 109 r/w 34 IPCand 376 of IPC, re-registered the case and submitted express F.I.Rs to all concerned officials.
(d) During the course of investigation, on 29-5-2020, PW.11 seized
MO.1 to MO.6 clothes of victim and A.1 under the cover of panchanama.
PW.11 sent Accused No.1 to judicial remand and also made requisition
before the Hon’ble Magistrate to send A.1 to Medical Officer, Government
Area Hospital, Adoni for conducting potency test. PW.8 Dr.M.Samiullah on 6 conducting potency test, issued Ex.P13 potency certificate that there is nothing to suggest that he cannot perform the sexual action.
(e) PW.4 V.Balakrishna, Head Master of TGLV High School issued age certificate of victim girl that her date of birth is 23-8-1993 and according to which, she is aged 16 years and 9 months.
(f)PW.9 Dr.Krishnaveni, Medical Officer, Government Women and
Children Hospital, Adoni examined the victim girl and issued opinion that on examination of victim girl, her hymen not in tact, admitting two fingers congested and tender to touch. She issued Ex.P15 opinion that there is nothing to suggest that there is no commission of intercourse on the victim.
After completion of investigation, LW.13 A.Ramchandra, Inspector of Police,
Adoni Town Circle filed charge sheet in this case.
07. This case was taken on file by the Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Adoni for the offence punishable u/Sec.366-A, 109 and 376 r/w 34 of IPC against
A.1 to A.4 and numbered as P.R.C.No.18/2011, committed the same to the
Hon’ble Court of Sessions, Kurnool, who in turn numbered it as
S.C.No.91/2014 and same was made over to this court for trial.
08. A.2 is reported dead and case against him was abated. A.1 being the juvenile offender, a separate charge sheet is ordered to be filed by the
Police before the Juvenile Justice Board, Kurnool. After appearance of A.3 and
A.4 before this Court, on hearing prosecution and the accused, charge for the offence punishable u/Sec. 366-A and 109 of IPC against the accused A.3 and
A.4 was framed, read over and explained to the accused in Telugu, for which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
09. During course of trial, prosecution has examined P.W.1 to P.W.11 and got marked Exs.P1 to Exs.P.22 and M.O.1 to MO.6. No defence witnesses are examined.
7
10. After closure of the prosecution evidence, A.3 and A.4 were examined u/Sec.313 Cr.P.C., for the incriminating evidence against them, for which they pleaded denial and reported no defence evidence.
11. Heard both sides and perused records.
12. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted arguments that on behalf of prosecution stating that P.W.1 to P.W.11 are examined, Exs.P.1 to
P.22and M.O.1 to MO.6 are marked. Though P.W.1 to P.W.7 turned hostile,
P.W.8 to P.W.11 have supported the case of prosecution. Taking into consideration of evidence of P.Ws.8 to 11, Exs.P.1 to P.22 and M.O.1 to MO.6, prayed for conviction of the accused.
13. The learned defence counsel submitted in his arguments that P.W.1 to
PW.7 turned hostile and did not support the case of prosecution. P.W.8 is who previously worked as Civil Assistant Surgeon at Government Area
Hospital, Adoni who examined A.1 and issued potency certificate of A.1,
P.W.9 who previously worked as Deputy Civil Surgeon, Government Women and Children Hospital, Adoni, who examined the victim girl and issued
Ex.P.15 opinion, PW.10 S.I. of Police, Adoni I Town Police Station and PW.11
Inspector of Police, who were the police officials, who registered the case and investigated into. In the absence of direct evidence against the accused, the evidence of PW.8 to 11 is not of any help to the prosecution case and conviction of accused can not be based on their evidence. Hence, prayed for acquittal of the accused.
14. Now the point for determination is:
“Whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of accused A.3
and A.4 for the charges u/Secs.366-A and 109 of IPC beyond all
reasonable doubts or not?” 8
15. POINT: To bring home the guilt of the accused, the prosecution has examined P.Ws.1 to P.W.11 and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.22 and M.O.1 to
MO.22. Perused the evidence of P.W.1 to P.W.11 and Exs.P.1 to P.22 and
MO.1 to MO.6.. Admittedly, P.W.1 deposed in his evidence that the prosecutrix is his daughter and he does not know LW.4 and LW.5. LW.6 is his friend. He does not know LW.7 and LW.8 and A.1 to A.4. A.1 is juvenile in conflict with law. He do not know anything about this case facts. He put his signature on white empty paper on the request of PW.10, who was the then
Inspector of Police, Adoni Town Circle. On the date of alleged offence, his daughter who is victim girl went to our relatives house at Adoni, without passing on any information. He also further deposed that he never complained before police officials at any point of time about the alleged incident. The prosecutrix who is his daughter never complained against A.1 about A.1 participation with her sexually and she never complained about kidnapping by A.1 to A.4 also. P.W.1 turned hostile without supporting the case of the prosecution, though he is father of prosecutrix.
16. Similarly, the Junior paternal uncle of prosecutrix by name A.
Raghunatha Rao and the victim who were examined as PW.2 and PW.3 also turned hostile and did not support the prosecution version. It is further deposed by prosecutrix that her father never lodged any complaint against
A.1 to A.4 for her missing and A.1 to A.4 never kidnapped her and A.1 never committed rape on her. PW.2 and PW.3 categorically stated that A.1 to A.4 are no way concerned with the alleged offence.
18. P.W.4-V.Balakrishna, who is working as Head Master in TGLV High
School, Adoni deposed that as to his verifying school records on the requisition of police, he gave date of birth certificate of prosecutrix basing upon admission register. He further deposed that as per the certificate issued by him, the date of birth of victim girl is 23-8-1993. Her age is nearly 9 17 ½ years. Ex.P5 is the date of birth certificate of PW.3 issued by him.
During cross-examination, PW.4 denied all the suggestions put by the defence counsel.
19. PW.5B.Satyanath, Village Revenue Officer and PW.6 C.Dhanunjaya
Reddy, who alleged to be the panchayatdars for the arrest of A.1 and A.2 by
PW.10, turned hostile and did not support the prosecution case. They categorically deposed that PW.10 never arrested accused No.1 and 2 in their presence and they signed at the behest of the police officials. PW.5 further deposed that clothes of PW.3 were not seized by police in his presence.
Though P.W.5 and PW.6 alleged to be panchayatdars for the arrest of accused No.1 and 2 and seizure of clothes turned hostile and not supported to the version of the prosecution. Their signatures in alleged panchanamas are marked as Ex.P6 to P9 respectively.
20. P.W.7-S.Chand Basha, who is the then Village Revenue Officer of
Mandigiri Panchayat-II, deposed that he do not know A.1 to A.4. He do not know anything about the case facts. At the request of police, he signed on some written papers without going through contents of it. At no point of time, PW.10 arrested A.1 in his presence and in the presence of PW.5. P.W.7 turned hostile without supporting the case of the prosecution, though he is panch witness to the arrest of A.1.
21. PW.8 Dr.M.Samiullah, the then Civil Assistant Surgeon at Government
Area Hospital, Adoni, who worked from June, 2008 to March,2011 deposed that on 3-6-2010, he examined a male calling himself as M.Samiullah, S/o
Mulla Vali (A.1) and found the following things :1) Moustache present, 2)
Beard growth present, 3) Axillary hair present, 4) Pubic hair present, 5) Penis is circumcised, 6) No hernia, hydrocele, novaricocele present, 7) Cremasteric reflex present. The general condition is stable CUS-S1S2 heard, Lungs are 10 clear. He collected whitish turbic fluids which were in turn sent to RFSL,
Kurnool for chemical analysis, who in turn gave RFSL Report. Ex.P12 is the
RFSL report pertaining to Whitish Turbic liquid marked as item No.14. Basing upon of the opinion of RFSL Report dated 4-12-2010, he issued final report opining that there is nothing to suggest that the accused A.1 examined by him is not capable of performing the act of sexual intercourse. Ex.P13 is
Potency certificate/final opinion of A.1. Ex.P13 further speaks that on items
No.1 to 13 does not contain human semen and spermatozoa. The cross- examination for PW.8 by the defence is reported as Nil.
22. PW.9 Dr. Krishnaveni, the then Deputy Civil Surgeon at Government
Area Hospital, Adoni, who worked from 30th June, 2007 to 30th June,2011, deposed that on 30-5-2010, Prosecutrix brought before her by the police of
Adoni I Town P.S. Then, she noted her identification marks, who was alleged to be kidnapped and raped on 10-5-2010. On examination of the girl, who was well built, nourished, both breasts, and pubic hairs developed well.
Hymen not in tact. Admitted two fingers. Vagina is congested and tendered to touch. Survic healthy. The following materials were collected and sent for chemical analysis to RFSL,Kurnool. 1) Swab from anterior vaginal walls, 2)
Posterior vaginal wall, 3) Right lateral wall, 4) left lateral wall. 5) Two smears of Survical segmitions and 6) Pubic hair. The girl was sent to GGH, Kurnool for age determination. She received RFSL Report on Sl.No.1 to 6, there is no spermetozoa. But the girl hymen is not in tact, admitting two fingers and congested and tender to touch. There is nothing to suggest that there is no committal of intercourse on the victim girl in her opinion. Ex.P12 is the RFSL
Report, which was already marked. Ex.P14 is the accidental report dated 30- 5-2010 at 10 P.M., pertaining to material objects which were collected from
Prosecutrix. Ex.P15 is the Final opinion given by her regarding sexual 11 intercourse on Prosecutrix. The cross-examination for PW.9 by the defence is reported as Nil.
23. PW.10 PSV Ramkishore, the then SI of Police, Adoni I Town PS deposed that on 14-5-2010 at 7 P.M., while he was present in the P.S., PW.1 came to
P.S., and presented Telugu written report. Basing upon which he registered case in Cr.No.115/2010 for girl missing and submitted Original F.I.R., to
JFCM, Adoni and copies to all concerned. Ex.P16 is the report of PW.1. Ex.P17 is the original First Information Report in Cr.No.115 of 2010. He further deposed that on the same day, he examined PW.1 and recorded his detailed statement. Then, immediately, he issued look out notice to all SHOs in AP regarding missing of victim girl, who was minor then. On 16-5-2010, he secured the presence of PW.2, examined and recorded his detailed statement, who expressed suspicion on A.1 to A.4.
24. PW.10 further deposed that on 17-5-2010, evening at 5.30 P.M., he received credible information regarding presence of A.2, viz., Syed Jameel.
Then, immediately, he secured the presence of PW.5 and PW.6 along with his staff, he left the P.S., and reached Havannapeta Elementary School at 6.15
P.M. There, one person standing infront of the school, who tried to skulk away on seeing them. With the active assistance of his staff, he caught hold him, in the presence of mediators, he interrogated A.2, who confessed the offence committed along with A.1, A3 and A.4. After informing the grounds, he arrested him under the cover of panchanama in the presence of PW.5 and
PW.6, in which PW.5 and PW.6 attested. Then, he left the place of arrest and reached P.S., along with arrested accused. Basing upon confessional statement of accused, he altered Section of Law from girl missing to
Sec.366-A, 109 r/w 34 IPC and re-registered the case and sent altered F.I.R.
to all concerned officials and also to the Hon’ble Court. Ex.P18 is the panchanama dated 17-5-2010 Ex.P19 is the altered F.I.R. submitted to the 12
Court. On 18-5-2010, he sent the A.2 to judicial remand after following due formalities.
25. PW.10 further deposed that on 29-5-2010, he received credible information about Shamir @ Shamiullah (A.1) and PW.3 at 4.45 P.M. Then immediately, he secured the presence of PW.5 and PW.7, left the P.S., along with his staff and reached APSRTC Bus-stand at 5 P.M. There, one male person and female person standing near Hyderabad bus-stop. On seeing them, they tried to skulk away. Then, he caught hold of them with the assistance of his staff. On interrogation, in the presence of PW.5 and PW.7,
A.1 confessed the offence and also confessed that he has committed sexual intercourse with PW.3. Then, he informed A.1 about the grounds of his arrest, arrested him under the cover of mediators nama dated 29-5-2010 at about 5
P.M. Ex.P20 is the said panchanama. He further deposed that he left the place of arrest and reached P.S., along with A.1 and PW.3. There at P.S., he examined PW.3 and recorded her statement. Basing upon on confessional statement of A.1 and statement of PW.3, he added Section 376 of IPC and informed the same to CI of II Town PS.., Adoni, who was incharge of I Town
PS.. Then, he handed over PW.3 and A.1 and CD file to PW.11 for further investigation. PW.1 to 3 stated before him as in Ex.P2 to P4.
26. During the cross-examination, PW.10 deposed by admitting that
Havannapeta Elementary School is busy locality, he did not try for mediators at the place of arrest of accused at Havannapeta Elementary School. He further admitted that RTC Bus-stand at where A.1 is arrested is also busy locality. He adds that as he secured mediators, who are PW.5 and PW.7, he has not made any efforts to secure local mediators. He denied other suggestions put by the defence counsel as false.
13 27. PW.11 A.Devadanam, the then C.I. of police at Adoni II town P.S., who worked from 29-11-2005 to 5-9-2010 deposed that he was kept in-charge of
I town P.S. Adoni. During the period of conducting investigation in this case, on 29-5-2010 at about 6.30 p.m., he received expressed FIR in
Cr.No.115/2010 U/Sec.366A, 109 r/w 34 and Sec. 376 IPC of Adoni I town P.S.
He has gone through the FIR received by him which was registered by S.I. of
Police(P.W.10) and took up further investigation on 29-5-2010 as P.W.10 handed over P.W.3 and A.1.
28. PW.11 further deposed that he secured the presence of PW.1 to 3 examined them and as they reiterated their earlier version made before
P.W.10 he has not re-recorded their statements once again. Then he sent
P.W.3 before medical officer (P.w.9) with a requisition to examine and preserve vaginal swabs from the victim girl (P.W.3) through W.P.C No.3078 at 8.00 pm on the same date for further investigation. He also made requisition to determine the age of P.W.3. Then he interrogated A.1 (Shamivulla) who voluntarily confessed about the commission offence of rape on P.W.3. He further stated that the clothes which he wearing are one and the same used by him at the time of committing rape. Then he instructed A.1 to exchange his clothes and seized his 1) Black jean pant 2)
One orange red strips with two pockets shirt 3) One brown colour under wear in the presence of P.W.5 and P.W.7 who were secured in advance, by preparing and seizure panchanama. He has also seized the clothes of P.W.3 i.e, 1) Punjabi dress with Kanakambaram colour on upper and lower side. 2)
Chunni of blue colour with white stripes. 3) Maroon colour underwear. Mo.1 to Mo.3 are wearing clothes of A.1 and M.O.4 to M.O.6 are wearing clothes of
P.W.3. Ex.P.21 is seizure panchanama prepared in the presence of P.W.5 and 7 to which they attested. He further deposed that he sent A.1 to Judicial remand after following due formalities before Juvenile Justice board. He also 14 sent requisition to the JFMC Adoni to send A1 before medical officer for potency test. He also sent clothes which are marked as Mo.1 to Mo.6 with a letter of advice before JMFC, Adoni on 15-6-2010 for chemical analysis before
Lw10. Ex.P.22 is letter of advice. He made requisition before P.W.4 for obtaining age certificate of P.W.3 and after his transfer the same was received by L.W.13. On 21-6-2010 L.W.13 assume charge and as such he handed over C.D file to him who perused the charge sheet and found it on correct lines and laid charge sheet along with all documents. He further deposed that A.3 and A.4 in this case obtained Anticipatory bail from Hon’ble
II Addl. District Court, Kurnool at Adoni in Crl.M.P.No.790/2010 dated 31-5-2010. During the cross-examination, PW.11 denied all the suggestions put by the defence counsel as false.
29. On perusal of evidence of P.Ws.1 to 10, it is very clear that P.Ws.1 to 3,
PW.5 to PW.7 turned hostile without supporting the case of the prosecution.
P.W.1 who being the father of the victim girl and P.W.2 who being the brother of the P.W.1 and the prosecutrix/PW.3, who are material witnesses to the prosecution case turned hostile without supporting the case of the prosecution. Moreover, P.W.5 to PW.7, who are arrest-cum-seizure panchanama witnesses are also not supported the case of the prosecution.
30. The material witnesses PW.1 to PW.3 (including victim girl) turned hostile and did not speak a single word against the accused as to their involvement in kidnapping and committing rape of prosecutrix. The panch witnesses PW.5 to PW.7 also turned hostile.
31. The evidence of P.Ws.8 to 11, who are medical officers and investigating officers, which lacks the independent corroboration. No material points are elicited through PW.4 by the defence counsel, but the evidence of PW.4 is only regarding the age of the prosecutrix and it is useful 15 for proving that the prosecutrix is aged about 17 1/2years only at the time of the offence.
32.The defence counsel reported no cross for PW.8 and PW.9. PW8, who examined A.1 and issued pendency certificate, which is marked as Ex.P13.
Ex.P13 further speaks that on Item No.1 to 13, there is no human semen and spermatozoa and the same is deposed by PW.8 during his chief-examination itself. No doubt, A.1 is capable of performing sexual intercourse as per
Ex.P13. It is concerned to A.1 alone. Further as already discussed above,
Ex.P13 further speaks that itemNo.1 to 13 does not contain human semen and spermatozoa, which weaks the case of the prosecution. The evidence of
PW.8 and PW.9 is relevant for coming to a conclusion about commission of the offence by A.1 against the prosecutrix, but not for any other purpose and the same can not be based for convicting Accused No.3 and 4. Added to it, prosecutrix, who is victim totally turned hostile along with PW.1 and PW.2, who are her father and the Junior Paternal Uncle respectively.
33.On perusal of cross-examination of PW.10, it is very clear that basing upon the confessional statement of A.1 and A.2, A.3 and A.4 are added as accused to this case and further, as the confession made by A.1 and A.2
before Police officials is inadmissible in evidence and the same is hit by
Section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act. Further, as seen from the cross- examination of PW10, PW.10 has not secured respectable inhabitants of the local area, while arresting A.1 and seizing clothes of A.1 and PW.3 and he secured PW.5 to 7, who are non-local and the PW.10 failed to follow seizure procedure as required U/S 100(4)of Cr.P.C., and the same is fatal to the case of prosecution.
34.No other evidence is available on record to connect the accused No.3 and 4 with the offence. Particularly, there is no iota of evidence against the 16
A.3 and A.4 and they are involved in the case basing on the confessional statements of other accused before the police officers, which is not admissible in law. Mere basing upon the evidence of P.Ws.4, 8 to 11 who are official witnesses alone, accused No.3 and 4 cannot be convicted. For the aforesaid reason, the evidence on record cannot be based for convicting the accused No.3 and 4.
35. As the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused No.3 and 4 beyond all reasonable doubts, the accused No.3 and 4 are entitled for benefit of doubt. Accordingly, this point is answered.
36. In the result, Accused A.3 and A.4 are found not guilty for the charge u/Sec.366-A and 109 of IPC and they are acquitted u/Sec.235 (1)
Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of Accused shall be in force for a period of six months as required u/Sec. 437-A of Cr.P.C. MO.1 to MO.6 shall be dealt as per the outcome of the case pending against A.1 before Juvenile Justice Board,
Kurnool.
Typed to my dictation to the Stenographer Gr.I, , corrected and pronounced by me in open court, this the 22 nd day of September, 2021.
ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,
ADONI.
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE:
P.W.1: A.Krishna Murthy -None- P.W.2: A.Raghunatha Rao P.W.3: Victim (Prosecutrix) P.W.4: V.Balakrishna P.W.5: B.Satyanath P.W.6: C.Dhananjaya Reddy P.W.7: S.Chand Basha P.W.8: Dr.M.Samiullah P.W.9: Dr.Krishnaveni PW.10: PSV Ram Kishore, the then S.I. of Police, Adoni I Town P.S. P.W.11: A.Devadanam, the then Inspector of Police, Adoni Town Circle.
17
EXHIBITS MARKED
FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE:
Ex.P.1: Signature on alleged complaint. -Nil Ex.P.2: 161(3) Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.1. Ex.P.3: 161(3) Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.2. Ex.P.4: 161(3) Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.3. Ex.P.5: Date of Birth certificate of prosecutrix. Ex.P.6: Signature on arrest panchanama of A.2 by PW.5 Ex.P.7: Signature of P.W.5 on arrest panchanama of A.1 by PW.5. Ex.P.8:Signature of PW.5 on seizure panchanama. Ex.P.9: Signature of PW.6 on arrest panchanama of A.2 Ex.P.10: Signature of PW.7 on arrest panchanama Ex.P.11: Signature of PW.7 on seizure panchanama. Ex.P.12: RFSL report. Ex.P.13: Potency certificate Ex.P.14: Accidental report Ex.P15: Opinion of Doctor Ex.P16 : Complaint Ex.P17: Original First Information Report in Cr.No.115/2010 of Adoni I Town P.S.. Ex.P18: Panchanama dated 17-5-2010
Ex.P.19: Altered F.I.R. Ex.P20: Panchanama dated 29-5-2010 Ex.P21: Seizure panchanama dated 29-5-2010 Ex.P22: Letter of Advice.
M.O’s MARKED
FOR PROSECUTION: M.O.1: Black jeans pant MO.2 : Orange red strips with two pockets shirt. MO.3: Brown colour underwear MO.4 : Punjabi dress with kanakambaram color on upper and lower side. MO.5 : Chunni of blue colour with white stripes MO.6 : Maron colour underwear.
FOR DEFENCE: Nil. A.S.J.
18