1 of 48
IN THE COURT OF THE FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT FOR
EXPEDITIOUS DISPOSAL OF CASES OF RAPE AND PROTECTION OF
CHILD AGAINST SEXUAL OFFENCES (POCSO) Act at PEDDAPALLI.
Present:- SRI. M.NAGARAJU, Prl. District and Sessions Judge, Peddapalli, FAC: Judge, Fast Track Special Court for Expeditious Disposal of cases of Rape and Protection of Child against Sexual offences (POCSO) Act, PEDDAPALLI.
FRIDAY, ON THIS THE 30 th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022
SESSIONS CASE No. 12 of 2022
Name of the complainantThe State through Sub Inspector of Police, Pothkapalli, (Crime No.157 of 2021 of P.S., Pothkapalli)
Name of the accusedThipparapu Rajender @ Spanser, S/o. Madhunaiah, Age 35 years, Caste: SC Madiga, R/o.Gudem of Odela (M), Aadhar No.5795 5073 5410, Cell: 9866509890.
CHARGESUnder section 354-D, 506 of IPC and Sec.12 of POCSO Act, 2012.
Plea of the accused“PLEADED NOT GUILTY”
Finding of the Court “FOUND GUILTY”
Sentence or OrderThe accused is found guilty for the offences punishable under sections 354-D, 506 of I.P.C., and Section 12 of POCSO Act .
He is convicted under section 235 (2) of
Cr.P.C.
The accused is sentenced to
UNDERGO RIGOROUS IMPRISONMENT
for a period of THREE (3) YEARS and also to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two
Thousand only)for theOFFENCE 2 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
UNDER SECTION 354-D I.P.C., in case of default in payment of fine, he shall undergo
Simple Imprisonment for a period of
THREE (3) MONTHS. Further, the
Accused is also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of
THREE (3) YEARS and also to pay fine of
Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only) for the offence under section 506 of
I.P.C., in case of default in payment of fine, he shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of THREE (3) MONTHS. Further, the accused is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of
THREE (3) YEARS for the offence under section 12 of POCSO Act., and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand only) in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of TWO (2) MONTHS. The substantive sentences shall run concurrently. The remand period which was already undergone by the accused shall be set-off as per Section 428 of Cr.P.C. M.O.1 shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.
Prosecution conducted byAdditional Public Prosecutor.
Accused defended bySri A.Hanuman Singh, Advocate 3 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
This case coming before me on 16-12-2022 for final hearing in the presence of Sri A.Hanuman Singh, Advocate for Accused and of Addl.P.P, for the State, having been heard, having perused the record and having stood over for consideration to this day the Court delivered the following:
:: J U D G M E N T ::
1.The Sub Inspector of Police, Pothkapalli has filed charge sheet against the accused in Crime No.157 of 2021 and alleged that the accused has committed the offence punishable under section 354-D, 506 of IPC and Sec.12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences
Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).
2.The following is the brief case of police as stated in the charge sheet:
2(a). That on 13.10.2021 at 17.30 hours the complainant XXX,
R/o .PQRS came to P.S., and lodged a telugu written petition, in which complainant stated that she blessed with one son and daughter, her daughter XYZ completed her intermediate. Once, her daughter/XYZ vocalizes the accused has been harassing XYZ (minor girl) from the past two years on name of love, demanding he would marriage XYZ. It was disgraceful matter complaint approached their caste well known persons, called the accused person asked in front of mediators about harassing thing then accused talked obscenely on XYZ. Further, the accused continued to stalking the XYZ, taunt 4 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
XYZ with obscene words, demanded XYZ come with him, he will marry XYZ. XYZ decided the harassment of accused could not bear anymore, so she put her studies to stand still. On 06.04.2021 around 14.00 hours accused went to XXX house threatened with dire consequences if any one intervened in his love matter. This is disrepute matter caused delay in submitting petition. Therefore, the
XXX requested to take necessary action against him.
2(b). Basing on the complaint, LW-16 has registered a case in
Cr.No.157/2021, U/sec 354-D, 506 of IPC, Sec.12 of POCSO Act, 2012 and took up the investigation. Soon after sending FIR’s to all concerned, LW-16 informed this incident to superior officers over telephone. During the course of investigation, LW-16 has examined and recorded the statement of LW-1 in the police station. During in the investigation, LW-16 have proceeded to Gudem(v), observed the scene of offence minutely in presence of the LWs.10 & 11, incorporated the same in the CDF, later LW-16 secured the presence of the LWs.2 to LW-6, examined and recorded their statements in
Part-II CDs. As the LW-7 is minor in her age factor, LW-16 requested superior officers orally with a request to depute a woman officer to examine and record the statement of the LW-7. Accordingly, a woman police officer/LW-15 has been deputed in this case, and the 5 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
LW-7 was got examined by the LW-15 and recorded her statement in Part-II CD same was recorded under video graph by LW-8.
2(c). Further investigation of the case, LW-17 have took up the case from LW-16, gone through the CD file and found investigation done by LW-16 is on proper lines. LW-17 have secured the presence of
LW-1 to 6 & 8, examined and found nothing adverse which they has disclosed before LW-16, so LW-17 not re-recorded their statement in
Part-II CD. Further, LW-17 filed a requisition before Hon’ble Court to record the statement of LW-7, under section 164 Cr.P.C., accordingly, on 22.01.2022, the Hon’ble Magistrate LW-14 recorded the statement of LW-7 under section 164 Cr.P.C. Further, LW-17 filed a requisition for date of birth certificate of LW-7, accordingly, the LW-9 issued date of birth certificate of LW-7 is (22.07.2004) as per date of birth the victim girl is minor, further LW-17 recorded the statement of LW-9 in Part-II CD in detail.
2(d). Further, the case of the prosecution is that in progress for the apprehension of accused on 01.04.2022 at 19.20 hours when LW-17 along with his men conducting vehicle checking at Bharath Petrol
Pump, Gumpula (v), found the suspicious movements of the accused caught by the police in suspicious condition and confessed his guilty. Immediately, LW-17 caught the accused. As the accused 6 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
was found in a mood to confess the offence, LW-17 secured the presence of two panch witnesses LW-12 & 13 and conducted confession panchanama.
2(e). Further, the case of the prosecution is that during the investigation, it is established that the LW-1 & 2 are the mother, father of the LW-7 and residing in Gudem village of Odela Mandal.
The accused is also belongs to Gudem village and in relevance he is cousin brother to LW-7. The LW-7 is studying 12th standard in
Jammikunta. From past (1) year the accused has started following the LW-7 intentionally on pretext of love and harassed her to accept his love and marriage proposal. Several times the accused has followed the LW-7 with close distance and harassed her to accept his proposals. The LW-7 reveal the same with her parents, then LW- 1 & 2 approached LW-3 to 6 called the accused, deposed him in front of LW-3 to 5, but accused talked obscenely about LW-7. On 06.04.2021 at 14.00 hours the accused has proceeded to the residence of the LW-1 created pandemomium situation threatening to kill LW-1 and their family members, if any one intervened with his love matter. Further, the accused continued his misbehaviour towards the LW-7 and her by stalking LW-7, taunt her with obscene words, demanded to come with him, saying he will marry her. LW-7 decided the harassment of accused could not bear anymore, so 7 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
LW.7 ended up her studies. The accused with an adverse nature and to get the LW-7 into his control and to blame them to demoralize their prestige, the accused collected LW-7 photographs, morphed them with some techniques in his mobile phone posted as his whats-app status, victim could not saved any data, accordingly due to fear, accused erased all data from his mobile phone which he used to harass the victim girl, by this reason LW-17 can’t recover any data reference to this crime. Thus, the accused has committed an offence punishable under section 354-D, 506 IPC, Sec.12 of
POCSO Act, 2012.
3.The I Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Karimnagar has taken the case on file for the offences punishable under section 354-D, 506 of IPC and Sec.12 of POCSO Act against the accused.
Subsequently, the case was transferred to the Court of Prl. District &
Sessions Judge, Peddapalli as per the Orders of Hon’ble Prl. District
& Sessions Judge, Karimnagar vide Dis.No.3579, dt.03.06.2022. On appearance of the accused, copies of the case records relied upon by the prosecution were furnished to the accused as contemplated under Sec.207 of Cr.P.C. Later, on the point of jurisdiction, this case was transferred to this Court, for disposal according to law.
8 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
4.On appearance of the accused, he was examined under section 228 of Cr.P.C. and charges under sections 354-D, 506 of IPC and Sec.12 of POCSO Act, 2012 have been framed against the accused and read over and explained the contents to him in Telugu, for which, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
5.In order to substantiate the case against the accused, on behalf of prosecution PWs.1 to PW-14 are examined and Exs.P-1 to
Ex.P-9 are marked.
6.After completion of the prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under section 313 of Cr.P.C., for which, he denied the evidence of PWs.1 to PW.14 and reported no defence evidence on his behalf.
7.Heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for prosecution and the learned counsel for accused and perused the record.
8.Now the point that arises for determination is:
“Whether the prosecution has established the guilt of
the Accused for the offence punishable under Section 354-D,
506 of I.P.C., Sec.12 of POCSO Act, 2012 beyond all
reasonable doubt?” 9 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
P O I N T:
9.The allegations against the accused is that the accused misbehaved with the victim girl and committed criminal intimidation by threatening the parents of the victim with dire consequences that if anyone intervened in their love matter and committed sexual harassment on the victim who is minor girl by using criminal force, harassed her by insulting her modesty by speaking obscene words, thereby the accused committed the offences punishable under sections 354-D, 506 of IPC and Sec.12 of POCSO Act, 2012.
10.In order to substantiate the allegations against the accused, the prosecution has got examined as many as (14) witnesses i.e.,
PWs-1 to PW-14 and also got marked Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-9. On the other side the plea of the accused is of total denial and no defence evidence was reported.
11.Of the prosecution witnesses, P.W.1 and 2 are the parents of victim, PW-6 is the victim, P.Ws.3 to 5 are the mediators to the incident, P.W.7 is the Headmaster, PW-8 is the panch witness for
CDF, PW-9 is the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, PW-10 is the photographer, PW-11 is the panch witness for the confession and seizure panchanama, PWs-12 to 14 are the Investigating Officers.
10 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
12.Now coming to the testimonies of prosecution witnesses one by one. As stated above, PW-1 is the mother of the victim and she deposed that PW-2/Ramesh is her husband, LW-3/Bhagyalaxmi,
PW.3/Abhilash & PW-4/Rajender, PW-5/Prabhakar are her villagers.
Further PW-1 deposed that PW-6/victim is her daughter who used to pursue her intermediate education at Jammikunta, in the year 2021.
Further, the accused herein who is brother in relation to her daughter/PW-6 used to follow her daughter in the name of love and insisted her to marry and used to talk in vulgar language and used to harass her daughter. Further, the PW-1 deposed that the above said acts of the accused were informed to PW-1 by her daughter. As such, they informed the same to the Lws.3, PWs.3 to 5 namely
Bhagyalaxmi, Abhilash, Rajender and Prabhakar and they asked the accused as to why he is misbehaving with PW-6/victim and inturn the accused talked with them also in vulgar language about PW-6/ victim. Further, PW-1 deposed that the accused continued his harassment and used to follow the PW-6/victim while going and coming from the college and he further used to talk vulgarly with
PW-6/ victim to love him and marry him. Due to the harassment of the accused and due to fear of the accused the PW-6/victim stopped going to the college. Further, the PW-1 deposed that the accused by editing the photos of her daughter kept in his phone as whatsapp 11 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
status and messages and caused much inconvenience to them.
Further, PW-1 deposed that on 06.04.2021 at 2.00 pm the accused came to their house and threatened to kill them, if they do not perform marriage of PW-6/victim with him. Further, PW-1 deposed that they feared that the acts of the accused are very vulgar, as such due to shame, they did not approach the police. As the accused continued his harassment, they filed a report against the accused on 13.10.2021. Ex.P-1 is the report lodged by PW-1.
12(a).During cross examination, PW-1 admitted that she did not mention the date of birth of her daughter/PW-6 in Ex.P.1.
However, PW-1 adds that due to tension she did not mention the date of birth of her daughter/PW-6. Further, PW-1 admitted that she did not mention in Ex.P-1 the year in which PW-6 pursued her intermediate. Further, PW-1 admitted that she did not mention in
Ex.P-7 that PW-6/victim was having mobile phone during her intermediate. Here, PW-1 says that as the college management did not allow any mobile phones as such, PW-6/victim used to use her mobile in their house only. Further, it is also admitted that she did not mention the mobile number in Ex.P-1 report and also did not mention the mobile number of the accused Rajender in Ex.P-1 report. Further, it is also admitted that she did not mention in 12 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
Ex.P.1 report the period during which the PW-6 did not attend her college on account of the alleged fear of the accused. Further, PW.1 admitted that Lws.3, PWs.3 to 5 namely Bhagyalaxmi, Abhilash,
Rajender and Prabhakar are their relatives. Except the above admissions, remaining portion of the cross examination is done by way of putting suggestion, for which the PW-1 denied.
13.Now coming to the evidence of PW-2 who is none other than the father of victim and he deposed that the accused is son in relation to him and brother in relation to his daughter/PW-6. LW3/Bhagyalaxmi is his villager, PW-3/Abhilash is his villager, PW.4/Rajender, PW-5/Prabhakar, PW-6/victim is his daughter. He blessed with one son and one daughter. PW-6 i.e., his daughter used to pursue her intermediate education at
Jammikunta., in the year 2021. Further, PW-1 deposed that the accused herein used to follow his daughter/PW-6 in the name of love and marriage and harassed her. Further, the accused used to follow his daughter in the name of love and insisted her to marry him and used to talk in vulgar language and used to harass his daughter.
Further, PW-1 deposed that the above said acts of the accused were informed to him by his daughter. As such, he informed the same to the LW's-3, PW.3 to PW-5 namely Bhagyalaxmi, Abhilash, Rajender and Prabhakar and they asked the accused as to why he is misbehaving with PW-6 and inturn the accused talked with them 13 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
also in vulgar language about PW-6 and the accused continued his harassment and used to follow the PW-6 while going and coming to the college and he further used to talk vulgarly with PW-6 to love him and marry him. Due to the harassment of the accused and due to fear of the accused the PW-6 stopped going to the college.
Further, PW-1 deposed that the accused by editing the Photos of his daughter kept in his phone as whatsapp status and messages and caused much inconvenience to them. Further, PW-1 deposed that on one day the accused came to their house and threatened to kill them, if they do not perform marriage of PW-6 with him. Further,
PW-2 deposed that he feared that the life of the PW-6 would be spoiled if they inform the acts of the accused to the police as they are very vulgar, as such due to shame, they did not approach the police. As the accused continued his harassment, as such they filed a report against the accused.
13(a). During cross examination, PW-2 admitted that LWs.3, PW-3 to PW-5 namely Bhagyalaxmi, Abhilash, Rajender and Prabhakar are his relatives. Further, PW-2 admitted that he did not mention the mobile number of the accused in his statement to the police. Except the above admissions, remaining portion of the cross examination is done by way of putting suggestions, for which the PW-2 denied.
14 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
14.Now coming to the evidence of PW-3 who is said to be mediator to the incident. According to his evidence he deposed that he knows P.Ws 1 and 2 and they are his agnates and he knows the accused by name Rajender @ Spanser and he is his brother's son and he belongs to his village. Further, PW-1 deposed that P.Ws 1 and 2 came to him and his sister LW3/Bhagyalaxmi and informed them that the accused is harassing their daughter i.e., PW-6 in the name of love and marriage, as such, requested them to ask the accused not to behave indecently with the PW-6 and also not to talk with her vulgarly. Accordingly, himself and LW3/Bhagyalaxmi asked the accused not to trouble the PW-6 with his acts, but the accused did not listen and continued his misbehaviour with PW-6. Further,
PW-3 deposed that the accused by editing the photos of PW-6 kept in his mobile as whatsapp status, so that the same can be seen by all. Further, PW-3 deposed that he has seen the whatsapp status of the accused containing the photos. Further, PW-3 deposed that as the accused continued his harassment, P.Ws.1 and 2 asked the PW.6 to stop going to the college. Due to the acts of the accused PW.6 stopped going to the college and the family of PW 1 suffered a lot.
Further, PW-3 deposed that P.Ws.1 and 2 also told him that the accused threaten them that he would kill them if, they interfere in the love matter of himself and PW.6.
15 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
14(a). During cross examination, PW-3 admitted that he did not state before the police as to what education the PW-6 was pursuing at the time of alleged incident and also he did not state before the police as to the avocation of the accused. Further, PW-3 admitted that he did not state before the police as to the duration during which the accused harassed the PW-6. Here, PW-3 says that since prior to one year from the date of complaint the accused was harassing PW-6.
Further, PW-3 admitted that he did not state before the police the mobile numbers of PW-6, himself and the mobile number of the accused. Further, PW-3 admitted that he did not state before the police that he have seen the photos of PW-6 in the whatsapp status.
Further, PW-3 admitted that he did not state before the police as to the number of photos of PW-6 kept by the accused in his whatsapp status. Remaining portion of the cross examination is done by way of putting suggestions, for which, PW-3 denied.
Now coming to the testimony of PW-4, who is said to be 15.
another mediator of the incident. According to his evidence, he deposed that he knows P.Ws 1 to 3 and the accused and they are his relatives. PW-6 is daughter of P.Ws 1 and 2. Further, PW-4 deposed that at the time of alleged incident he was caste elder and
P.Ws.1 and 2 came to him and informed that the accused Rajender @ Spanser was harassing PW-6 in the name of love and marriage.
16 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
Upon that he called the accused Rajender @ Spanser and asked him not to harass PW-6 and not to misbehave and not to talk indecently with her as she is sister in relation to the accused Spanser. But, the accused did not change his behaviour and continued his acts of harassing the PW-6. Further, PW-4 deposed that the accused by editing the photos of PW-6in his mobile kept the same as his whatsapp status by placing his photo and the photo of PW-6 combined with love symbol. Further, PW-4 deposed that P.Ws 1 and 2 informed him that he would kill them if, they interfere in the matter of him and PW-6.
15(a).During cross examination, it is elicited by PW-4 that the
P.Ws.1 and 2 did not give any written representation regarding the acts of the accused, but they orally informed him. Further, PW-4 admitted that he did not state before the police as to what education the PW-6 was pursuing. Further, PW-4 admitted that he did not state before the Police as to the owning of mobile phones and their respective numbers of PW-6 and accused. Further, PW-4 admitted that he did not state before the police as to whom the accused kept the whatsapp status. Remaining portion of the cross examination is done by way of putting suggestions, for which, PW-4 denied.
17 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
16.Now coming to the evidence of PW-5, who is said to be another mediator for the incident. According to his evidence, he deposed that he knows P.Ws.1 to 4 and the accused and they are his relatives. PW-6 is daughter of P.Ws 1 and 2. Further, PW-5 deposed that at the time of alleged incident he was caste elder and
P.Ws 1 and 2 came to him and informed that the accused Rajender @ Spanser was harassing PW-6 in the name of love and marriage.
Upon that he called the accused Rajender@ Spanser and asked him not to harass PW-6 and not to misbehave and not to talk indecently with her as she is sister in relation to the accused Spanser. But, the accused did not change his behaviour and continued his acts of harassing the PW-6. Further, PW-5 deposed that the accused by editing the photos of PW-6 in his mobile kept the same as his whatsapp status by placing his photo and the photo of PW-6 combinedly and also kept the status open so that everyone will come to know. Further, PW-5 deposed that the accused even messaged to marry PW-6.
16(a). During cross examination, it is elicited that the police examined him while he was present with P.W-1, PW-2, P.W-3 and PW-4. Further, PW-5 admitted that the P.Ws 1 and 2 did not give any written representation regarding the acts of the accused, but they orally informed him. Further, PW-5 admitted that he did not state before the police as to what 18 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
education the PW-6 was pursuing and he did not state before the police as to the owning of mobile phones and their respective numbers of PW-6 and accused. Further, PW-5 deposed that he did not state before the police as to whom the accused kept the
Whatsapp status. Remaining portion of the cross examination is done by way of putting suggestions, for which, PW-5 denied.
17.Now coming to the evidence of PW-6 who is none other than the victim. According to her evidence, she deposed that P.Ws.1 and 2 are her parents. P.Ws 3 to 5 are her relatives and they belongs to her village. Further, PW-6 deposed that she knows the accused standing in the court hall by name Thipparapu Rajender @ Spanser and he is her relative and brother in relation to her. Further, PW-6 deposed that since one year prior to the lodging of the report against the accused, the accused was behind her and followed her stating that he would marry her. When she asked him as to why you are following her, he talk with her in vulgar language and asked her to marry him and harassed her.
Further, PW-6 deposed that she informed the acts of the accused to her parents and they approached their relatives P.Ws.3 to 5 and
LW3/ Bhagyalaxmi. Further, when the above said persons questioned the accused, the accused talked in front of them also about her in vulgar language. Further, PW-6/victim deposed that the accused is harassing her by talking in vulgar language with her and asked her to come with him and marry him, as such, she even 19 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
stop going to the college. Further, PW-6 deposed that the accused sent text messages through his mobile phone bearing
No.8519805410 to her mobile phone and kept her photo and the accused photo combinedly in his whatsapp status and sent the videos asking her to marry him and harassed her. Further, PW-6 deposed that on 06.04.2021, the accused came to their house and stood in front of their house and threatened her and her parents that if, anybody objects to the marriage of the accused with him, he would kill them. With the reason that if, the above said acts of the accused are known to the public they will loose their prestige, as such, they did not inform the acts of the accused to the police.
Even then the accused continued to follow her and talked with her in vulgar language and harassed her, as such, they filed report against the accused. Police examined her and recorded her statement.
Further, PW-6 deposed that she gave her Sec.164 Cr.P.C statement
before Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sulthanabad. Ex.P2 is the
Sec.164 Cr.P.C statement given by PW6 before Magistrate.
During cross examination, PW-6 deposed that at the time of the 17(a).
police examining her and recording her Sec. 161 Cr.P.C., statement herself and her mother PW.1 were present and the police recorded her statement at her residence. Further, PW-6 admitted that prior 20 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
to the alleged incident there were no talking terms between their family and the accused. Further, PW-6 admitted that she did not state her mobile number to the police. Further, PW-6 denied the suggestion put forth by the learned counsel for the accused that the accused did not talk about her in vulgar language in front of the
P.Ws 3 to 5 and LW3/Bhagyalaxmi and her parents did not approach
P.Ws 3 to 5 and LW3/ Bhagyalaxmi and they did not question the accused and in fact the accused never followed her and never harassed her and never talked with her in vulgar language.
18.Now coming to the evidence of PW-7 who is said to be
Headmaster of Z.P.H.S School, Gumpula village. According to his evidence, on 22.01.2022, the police, Pothkapalli gave a requisition to him to furnish the date of birth certificate of PW6/victim and accordingly, on 24.01.2022, he furnished the study, conduct and date of birth certificate of PW6, daughter of PW2 after verifying the records. As per the records the date of birth of PW6/victim is 22.07.2004. Ex.P3 is the requisition given by the police to furnish the date of birth certificate of PW6. Ex.P4 is the study, conduct and date of birth certificate of PW6. On the other side, the learned counsel for the accused reported no cross examination on his behalf.
21 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
19.Now coming to the evidence of PW-8 who is said to be panch witness for crime details form. According to his evidence, he deposed that on 14.10.2021, the police Pothkapalli called him and
LW.11/T. Sheshikumar to the house of PW.1 situated at Gudem village and conducted Crime Details Form by observing the scene of offence minutely and noting down the boundaries of the scene of offence. Further, PW-8 deposed that the police also drafted rough sketch of the scene and incorporated the same in the Crime Details
Form. After scribing the Crime Details Form the police read over the contents of the same to him and LW.11/T.Sheshikumar and himself and LW.11/T. Sheshikumar signed on the same. Ex.P5 is the Crime
Details Form along with rough sketch of the scene.
19 (a).During cross examination, PW-8 stated that two police persons were present at the time of conducting the Ex.P5 and no villagers were present at that time and the above said two police persons also signed on the panchanama. Further, PW-8 admitted that he cannot specifically identify out of the two police personnel who is S.l., of police and who is constable. Further, PW-8 pleaded ignorance that he do not remember as to whether the S.l of police or the constable scribed the Ex.P5. However, PW-8 denied the suggestion that the police never called him and LW.11/T.
Sheshikumar and never conducted any panchanama before them 22 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
and they signed the Ex.P5 at the police station and he deposing false at the instance of the police.
20.Now coming to the evidence of PW-9. According to his evidence, he deposed that he worked as Junior Civil Judge-cum-
Judl.Magistrate of First class, Sultanabad from 07.01.2019 to 24.08.2022 and he was placed in-charge as Junior Civil Judge,
Peddapalli from March, 2020 to 17-10-2021 and in the capacity of
Junior civil Judge, peddapalli he has received requisition from SHO,
Pothkapalli to record Sec.164 Cr.P.C., statement, dt.1 8.01.2022, accordingly, he sent summons to victim and on 25.01.2022, he recorded Sec.164 Cr.P.C., statement of PW.6 under Ex.P-2, in which she has stated that accused by name Thipparapu Rajender who happened to be brother by courtesy and he approached her and insisted her to marry him, for which PW-6 informed the same to her parents also and they have discontinued her studies and due to accused asking PW-6 every time that he will marry her and insisted her by making phone calls and also sending messages through his cell phone and he also threatened PW-6 that if she fails to marry him he will do away the lives of her entire family members, as a result of which on 06.04.2021 while PW-1 is in the job of worshiping
Yellamma, accused came with axe and threatened that he will do 23 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
away the life of PW-6 and her mother stating so he insisted to marry him, failing which he will do away the lives of her parents and the matter was placed before elders, the accused failed to obey elders words and basing upon their inability to solve the matter, police report has been given by mother of PW-6 against the accused for his harassing PW-6 with an intention to get marry her.
Further, PW-9 deposed that the victim is aged below 18 years and the same is known to me upon perusal of the date of birth of the minor. Before recording her statement he have posed questions about her knowledge and ability to know as to her capacity to give her statement and after thoroughly convinced about the rational answers given by declarant he has recorded her statement.
Accordingly, he concluded recording of the statement of PW.6 and later sent to concerned Court for record purpose. Ex.P-6 is-the requisition of S.H.O., P.S., Pothkapalli.
20 (a).During cross examination, PW-9 admitted that PW-6/ victim did not state before him the phone numbers of herself and that of the accused and PW-6 did not state to him the names of elders before whom the matter has placed by her. However, PW-9 denied the suggestion that the Sec.164 of Cr.P.C., statement of
PW.6 was not given voluntarily and he did not follow the proper procedure while recording the same.
24 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
Now coming to the evidence of PW-10, who is said to be 21.
photographer. According to his evidence, he deposed that he is running a photo studio by name Royal Photo Studio at Sulthanabad and also working as outdoor photographer. Further, he deposed that on 14.10.2021 the police, Pothkapalli called him to the Gudem village of Odela Mandal and the police asked him to videograph the recording of the statement of the victim girl and accordingly he videographed the recording of Sec. 161 Cr.P.C. statement of the girl by one women S.l. of police. Further, PW-10 deposed that while recording the same he came to know that one person was harassing the female girl. After videographing the recording of Sec. 161
Cr.P.C. statement of the female he handed over the C.D. containing the recording of Sec. 161 Cr.P.C., statement of female to the
Pothkapalli police. Ex.P7 is the C.D. handed over by me to the police.
21(a).During cross examination, PW-10 stated that he did not file any document to show that he is running Royal photo studio at
Sulthanabad. Further, he stated that he did not file any document to show that he is having experience in photography and videography. Further, he stated that the police did not pay any 25 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
amount for videographing the Ex.P7. However, PW-10 denied the suggestion that the police never called him and he never videographed the statements of any persons and he is not a photographer and he is deposing false and he is a stock witness and
Ex.P7 is created and he did not handed over Ex.P7 C.D. to the police.
22.Now coming to the evidence of PW-11 who is said to be panch witness for confession-cum-seizure panchanama. According to his evidence, he knows LW.13/ Pallerla Ramesh and he is his villager.
Further, PW-11 deposed that on 01.04.2022 while himself and
LW.13/Pallerla Ramesh were proceeding to their agricultural fields the police were conducting vehicle checking near the Bharat Petrol
Bunk at Gumpula village and the police called him and
LW.13/Pallerla Ramesh and requested to enquire the accused and accordingly himself and LW.13/Pallerla Ramesh inquired the accused as to why he is in the custody of the police, then the accused gave his name as Thipparapu Rajender @ spancer and gave his particulars and confessed his guilt in the instance case.
After confessing his guilt the accused took up one mobile phone from his pocket and shown to them stating that through that mobile he committed alleged acts and he further stated that he has deleted the entire data from the mobile. Further, PW-11 deposed that the 26 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
accused handed over the said mobile phone to them and it was blue colour SAMSUNG phone and the police scribed the confession panchanama upon our narration and seized the SAMSUNG phone by pasting the panch chits on it. Further, PW-11 deposed that the police after scribing the confession cum seizure panchanama read over the contents of the same to him and LW.13 /Pallerla Ramesh and after verifying the same to be correct himself and LW.13 scribed their signatures on it. M.O.I is the blue colour SAMSUNG phone which was seized from the accused basing on his confession, Ex.P8 is the relavant portion of the confession cum seizure panchanama.
22(a).During cross examination, PW-11 stated that about (4) to (5) police persons were present when the police called them and about 4 to 5 vehicles were passing over near the Petrol pump when the police called them. Further, PW-11 stated that the S.l., of police scribed the panchanama. However, PW-11 pleaded ignorance that he do not know as to how many police personal signed on the panchanama after obtaining their signatures. Further, PW-11 stated that the accused did not show his I.D. proof to them when they enquired him but he orally informed his name and particulars.
However, PW-11 denied the suggestion that the accused is not having any mobile phone and M.O.I was not seized from his possession and he deposing false at the instance of police.
27 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
23.Now coming to the remaining witnesses i.e., PWs.12 t 14 who are investigating officers. According to the evidence of PW-12 on 14.10.2021 the C.I. of police sulthanabad instructed him to record the statements of victim girl at Gudem village. Accordingly, he went to the Gudem village to the house of PW.1 and recorded the Sec.161
Cr.P.C. statement of the victim girl i.e., PW.6 in the presence of
PW.1 and got the same videographed through PW.10 and he handed over the Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.6 to the I.O. and the I.O., examined him and recorded his statement.
23(a).During cross examination, PW-12 admitted that the victim did not state her mobile number in her statement. Except the above admission, no fact in contra is elicited in favour of the accused and remaining portion of the cross examination is done by way of putting suggestions, for which PW-12 denied.
24.Now coming to the evidence of another Investigating Officer i.e., PW-13. According to his evidence, on 13.10.2021 at 17.30 hrs the complainant i.e. PW.1 came to the Pothkapalli P.S. and lodged a written complaint under Ex.P1. Basing on the same he registered a case in Cr.No.157/2021 under Sec.354-D, 506 IPC, Sec.12 of POCSO
Act. He sent the FIR to all the concerned. Ex.P9 is the F.I.R. On the 28 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
same day he recorded the Sec.161 Cr.P.C., statement in the police station. On the next day he visited the scene of offence situated at
Gudem village and the secured the presence of PW.8 and
LW.11/T.Shashikumar and conducted the crime detail form under
Ex.P5 in their presence. Further, PW-13 deposed that on the same day he examined PW.2, LW.3/Bhagyalaxmi, PW.3, PW.4, PW.5 and recorded their statements. As the PW.6 is a minor he made a oral request to the superior officers to depute a woman officer to examine and record the statements of PW.6. Accordingly, PW.12 was deputed and PW.6 was got examined by PW.12 and recorded the statement under videography by PW.10. Further, PW-13 deposed that later he handed over the CD file to the LW.17
S.Laxman, S.l. of Police, P.S., Pothkapalli for further investigation.
24(a).During cross examination, PW-13 admitted that PW 1 did not state in her report under Ex.P1 about the victim i.e. PW.6 possessing mobile phone. Further, PW-13 admitted that PW.2 to 5 and LW.3 did not state before him as to at whose house the panchayat was conducted. Further, PW-13 admitted that the witnesses did not state before him as to whom the accused forwarded his whatsapp status. Here, PW-13 says that the accused kept the whatsapp status open to all. Further, PW-13 admitted that
PW.1 to 5 and LW.3/Bhagyalaxmi did not state before him the 29 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
mobile number of the accused. Further, PW-13 admitted that he did not file the receipt of payment made to PW-10 photographer.
Further, PW-13 admitted that he did not file any document to show that PW.10 was a photographer. However, PW-13 denied the suggestion that the PW.10 never videographed the recording of
Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of the victim girl, one police constable by name Rajender accompanied him to the scene of offence and he did not obtained his signature on the C.D.F., and he registered a false case against the accused without verifying the true facts and he did not examine any of the witnesses and he is deposing false and the accused is no way connected with this case.
25.Now coming to the evidence of another Investigating Officer i.e., PW-14. According to his evidence, he deposed that on 18.01.2022 he filed a requisition before the concerned Magistrate and accordingly on 22.01.2022 the Hon'ble Magistrate recorded the statement of PW.6 under Sec.164 Cr.P.C. statement. Further, PW-14 deposed that he made a requisition to PW.7 to issue the date of birth certificate of the victim girl and accordingly PW.7 issued Date of birth certificate of PW.6 and he recorded the Sec.161 Cr.P.C.
statement of PW.7. Further, PW-14 deposed that on 01.04.2022 at 19.20 hrs while himself along with his men were conducting vehicle checking at Bharat petrol pump Gumpula village found the accused 30 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
moving suspiciously, as such apprehended him and when he was in a mood to confess secured the presence PW.11 and LW.13/
P.Ramesh upon enquiry by the confession panch the accused confessed his guilt. Further, PW-14 deposed that basing on confession of the accused seized mobile phone of the accused (SAMSUNG GALAXY) under M.O.1. Here, PW-14 says that the M.O.I was belongs to A03 core model, with IMEI No. 353069184147 655814 with Airtel No.9866509890 and the M.O.1 was seized in the presence the above said panch witnesses by pasting their panch chits. Further, PW-14 deposed that on the same day arrested the accused by following the due procedure and sent him to Judicial remand as per the law. After collecting all the documents and completing the entire investigation, he filed charge sheet against the accused under section 354-D, 506 IPC and Sec. 12 of POCSO
Act-2012.
25(a).During cross examination, PW-14 admitted that he did not file any document to show that he was on vehicle checking duty on 01.04.2022. Further, PW-14 admitted that he did not mention the mobile number of the victim girl. Further, PW-14 admitted that he did not collect any document to show that the Airtel SIM bearing
No.9866509890 belongs to the accused. However, PW-14 denied the suggestion that the M.O.1 does not belongs to the accused and 31 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
in fact the accused is not having any mobile phone as he is a very poor person and the accused is no way connected with the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated in this case by him without verifying the true facts and he filed this case against the accused only for statistical purpose by doing table investigation.
26.Before going into the merits of the case, the section 354-D of IPC which reads as under:
(1) Any man who—
1. follows a woman and contacts, or attempts to contact such woman to foster personal interaction repeatedly despite a clear indication of disinterest by such woman; or
2. monitors the use by a woman of the internet, email or any otherformofelectroniccommunication, commits the offence of stalking;
Provided that such conduct shall not amount to stalking if the man who pursued it proves that—
1. it was pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime and the man accused of stalking had been entrusted with the responsibility of prevention and detection of crime by the State; or
2. it was pursued under any law or to comply with any condition or requirement imposed by any person under any law; or
3. in the particular circumstances such conduct was 32 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
reasonable and justified.
(2) Whoever commits the offence of stalking shall be punished on first conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine; and be punished on a second or subsequent conviction, with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, and shall also be liable to fine.
26(a).Further, Section 506 of IPC, which read as follows:
Punishment for criminal intimidation. —Whoever commits, the offence of criminal intimidation shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both; If threat be to cause death or grievous hurt, etc. And if the threat be to cause death or grievous hurt, or to cause the destruction of any property by fire, or to cause an offence punishable with death or [imprisonment for life], or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, or to impute, unchastity to a woman, shall be punished with imprison- ment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both.
26(b).Further, Section 12 of POCSO Act, which reads as follows:
Section 12 - Punishment for sexual harassment 33 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
Whoever, commits sexual harassment upon a child shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.
27.On perusal of the evidences of PWs.1 to 14, PWs.1 & 2 who are parents of the victim has stated that the accused herein who is brother in relation to the victim/PW-6 used to follow the victim in the name of love and insisted her to marry him and used to talk in vulgar language and used to harass their daughter i.e., victim/PW-6.
As such, they informed the acts of accused to PWs.3 to 5 &
LW-3/Bhagyalaxmi, in turn PW-3 to PW-5 & LW-3 asked the accused, as to why he is misbehaving with PW-6/victim, for which the accused talked with them also in vulgar language and did not change his attitude and continued his harassment towards the victim/PW-6.
Further, they deposed that the accused by editing the photos of their daughter kept in his phone as whatsapp status and sent messages and caused much inconvenience and further the accused came to their house and threatened to kill them, if they do not perform marriage of PW-6 with him. Further, the crucial witnesses i.e., mediators to the incident i.e., PWs.3 to 5 were also deposed
before this Court that PWs.1 & 2 informed them that the accused is
harassing their daughter i.e., PW-6/victim in the name of love and marriage, as such, requested them to ask the accused not to behave 34 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
indecently with the PW-6/victim and also not to talk with her vulgarly. Accordingly, they asked the accused not to trouble the
PW-6 with his acts, but the accused did not listen and continued his misbehaviour with PW-6. Further, they deposed that the accused by editing the photos of PW-6 kept in his mobile as whatsapp status, so that the same can be seen by all. Further, they deposed that he have seen the whatsapp status of the accused containing the photos. Further, they deposed that as the accused continued his harassment, P.Ws.1 and 2 asked the PW-6 to stop going to the college. Due to the acts of the accused, PW-6 stopped going to the college and the family of PW.1 suffered a lot. Further, they deposed that P.Ws.1 and 2 also told them that the accused threaten them that he would kill them if, they interfere in the love matter of himself and PW-6.
28.Further, on perusal of the evidence of PW-6/victim, she deposed before this Court that P.Ws.1 and 2 are her parents. P.Ws 3 to 5 are her relatives and they belongs to her village. Further, PW-6 deposed that she knows the accused standing in the court hall by name Thipparapu Rajender @ Spanser and he is her relative and brother in relation to her.
Further, PW-6 deposed that since one year prior to the lodging of the report against the accused, the accused was behind her and followed her stating that he would marry her. When she asked him 35 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
as to why he is following her, he talked with her in vulgar language and asked her to marry him and harassed her. Further, PW-6 deposed that she informed the acts of the accused to her parents and they approached their relatives P.Ws.3 to 5 and LW3/
Bhagyalaxmi. Further, when the above said persons questioned the accused, the accused talked in front of them also about her in vulgar language. Further, PW-6/victim deposed that the accused is harassing her by talking in vulgar language with her and asked her to come with him and marry him, as such, she even stopped going to the college. Further, PW-6 deposed that the accused sent text messages through his mobile phone bearing No.8519805410 to her mobile phone and kept her photo and the accused photo combinedly in his whatsapp status and sent the videos asking her to marry him and harassed her. Further, PW-6 deposed that on 06.04.2021, the accused came to their house and stood in front of their house and threatened her and her parents that if, anybody objects to the marriage of the accused with him, he would kill them. With the reason that if, the above said acts of the accused are knows to the pubic they will loose their prestige, as such, they did not inform the acts of the accused to the police. Even then the accused continued to follow her and talked with her in vulgar language and harassed her, as such, they filed report against the accused. Police examined 36 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
her and recorded her statement. Further, PW-6 deposed that she gave her Sec.164 Cr.P.C statement before Judicial Magistrate of First
Class, Sulthanabad. Ex.P2 is the Sec.164 Cr.P.C statement given by
PW-6 before Magistrate.
29.Here, the evidence of the PW-6/victim is corroborated with the evidence of PW-9 who is Magistrate and who recorded the statement of the victim under section 164 Cr.P.C., is that on 25.01.2022, he recorded Sec.164 Cr.P.C., statement of PW.6 under Ex.P-2, in which she has stated that accused by name Thipparapu Rajender who happened to be brother by courtesy and he approached her and insisted her to marry him, for which PW-6 informed the same to her parents also and they have discontinued her studies and due to accused asking PW-6 every time that he will marry her and insisted her by making phone calls and also sending messages through his cell phone and he also threatened PW-6 that if she fails to marry him he will do away the lives of her entire family members, as a result of which on 06.04.2021 while PW-1 is in the job of worshiping
Yellamma, accused came with axe and threatened that he will do away the life of PW-6 and her mother stating so he insisted to marry him, failing which he will do away the lives of her parents and the matter was placed before elders, the accused failed to obey elders 37 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
words and basing upon their inability to solve the matter, police report has been given by mother of PW-6 against the accused for his harassing PW-6 with an intention to get marry her.
30.Whereas, on perusal of the evidence of panch witnesses for crime details form i.e., PW-8, it is elicited that on 14.10.2021, the police Pothkapalli called him and LW.11/T.Sheshikumar to the house of PW.1 situated at Gudem village and conducted Crime Details
Form by observing the scene of offence minutely and noting down the boundaries of the scene of offence. Further, PW-8 deposed that the police also drafted rough sketch of the scene and incorporated the same in the Crime Details Form. After scribing the Crime Details
Form the police read over the contents of the same to him and
LW.11/T.Sheshikumar and himself and LW.11/T. Sheshikumar signed on the same. Ex.P5 is the Crime Details Form along with rough sketch of the scene.
31.Whereas, on perusal of the evidence of PW-11 who is panch witness for confession-cum-seizure panchanama, he deposed that he knows Lw.13/ Pallerla Ramesh and he is his villager. Further,
PW.11 deposed that on 01.04.2022 while himself and LW.13/Pallerla
Ramesh were proceeding to their agricultural fields the police were 38 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
conducting vehicle checking near the Bharat Petrol Bunk at
Gumpula village and the police called him and LW.13/Pallerla
Ramesh and requested to enquire the accused and accordingly himself and LW.13/Pallerla Ramesh inquired the accused as to why he is in the custody of the police, then the accused gave his name as Thipparapu Rajender @ spancer and gave his particulars and confessed his guilt in the instance case. After confessing his guilt the accused took up one mobile phone from his pocket and shown to them stating that through that mobile he committed alleged acts and he further stated that he has deleted the entire data from the mobile. Further, PW-11 deposed that the accused handed over the said mobile phone to them and it was blue colour SAMSUNG phone and the police scribed the confession panchanama upon our narration and seized the SAMSUNG phone by pasting the panch chits on it. Further, PW-11 deposed that the police after scribing the confession cum seizure panchanama read over the contents of the same to him and LW.13 /Pallerla Ramesh and after verifying the same to be correct himself and LW.13 scribed their signatures on it.
M.O.I is the blue colour SAMSUNG phone which was seized from the accused basing on his confession, Ex.P8 is the relevant portion of the confession cum seizure panchanama.
39 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
32.On the other side, the learned counsel for the accused has relied on some of the contentions which posed on the witnesses as suggestions during their cross examination are that in Ex.P-1, PW-1 did not mention the date of birth of her daughter/PW-6. Further,
PW-1 did not mention in Ex.P-1 the year in which PW-6 pursued her intermediate. Further, PW-1 did not mention in Ex.P-1 that PW-6/ victim was having mobile phone during her intermediate. Further,
PW-1 did not mention the mobile number in Ex.P-1 report and also did not mention the mobile number of the accused Rajender in
Ex.P.1 report. Further, PW-1 did not mention in Ex.P.1 report the period during which the PW-6 did not attend her college on account of the alleged fear of the accused. For the above said contentions, when the learned counsel for the accused posed as suggestions in the cross examination, all the witnesses were admitted the same.
Further, to prove the date of birth of the victim/PW-6, the prosecution has examined PW-7 who is said to be Headmaster of
Z.P.H.S School, Gumpula village. According to his evidence, on 22.01.2022, the police, Pothkapalli gave a requisition to him to furnish the date of birth certificate of PW6/victim and accordingly, on 24.01.2022, he furnished the study, conduct and date of birth certificate of PW6, daughter of PW2 after verifying the records. As per the records the date of birth of PW6/victim is 22.07.2004. Ex.P3 40 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
is the requisition given by the police to furnish the date of birth certificate of PW-6. Ex.P-4 is the study, conduct and date of birth certificate of PW-6. However, the learned counsel for the accused reported cross examination of PW.7 as Nil. Further, On perusal of
Ex.P-4, the date of birth of the victim girl is 22.07.2004, therefore, as on the date of offence i.e., 13.10.2021, the victim girl/PW-6 was aged 17 years. Hence, the evidence of PW-7 supports the case of prosecution to the extent that the victim girl is minor.
33.Further, the another contention raised by the learned counsel
for the accused is that the mobile numbers of PW-6/victim girl as
well as the accused did not mention in the Ex.P-1 and
PW-14/Investigation Officer has also not verified whether the SIM card containing in the M.O.1/Sumsung mobile belongs to the accused. To the above contention, the evidence of Pws.1 to 6 who are parents, mediators/caste elders as well as victim is clear that the accused by editing the photos of victim kept in his phone as whatsapp status. Further, the evidence of PW-11 is clear that the while recording confession panchanama, the accused produced one mobile phone from his pocket and shown to them stating that through that mobile he committed alleged acts and he further stated that he has deleted the entire data from the mobile. Hence, it is clear from the evidence of PW.1 to 6 that the accused has 41 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
harassed the victim girl/PW-6 through mobile phone, hence, the necessity of mobile number will not make any difference in view of the alleged offence committed by the accused.
34.Therefore, the evidence of PWs.1 & 2 who are the parents of the victim/PW-6 have supported the case of the prosecution and the evidence of PW-6/victim girl whose evidence is very important to prove the guilt of the accused has also supported the case of the prosecution. Further, the evidence of PW-7 who is Head Master at
ZPHS School, Gumpula village, who issued Ex.P-4 study, conduct and date of birth certificate of PW-1/victim girl. On perusal of Ex.P4, the date of birth of the victim girl is 22.07.2004, therefore, as on the date of offence i.e., 13.10.2021, the victim girl/PW-1 was aged 17 years. Hence, the evidence of PW-7 supports the case of prosecution to the extent that the victim girl is minor. Moreover, the evidence of PW.8 who is said to be panch for crime details form/Ex.P-5 also supported the case of prosecution. Further, the evidence of PWs.12 to 14 who are Investigating Officers have deposed regarding the investigation done by them. Hence, the evidence of PWs.1 to 14 is corroborating with each other in regard to the alleged offences committed by the accused. Moreover, the statement under Sec. 164 Cr.P.C., is also corroborated by the open- 42 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
state deposition of the victim girl/PW-6. Therefore, it can be said that there is ample evidence before the Court against the Accused to attract the alleged offences against him that the accused used to follow the victim/PW-6 in the name of love and insisted her to marry him and used to talk in vulgar language and used to harass the victim/PW-6. However, the allegation that the accused edited the photos of the victim/PW-6 and kept the same as whatsapp status in his mobile phone and sent messages to the victim/PW-6 is not proved, hence, the prosecution has failed to retrieve the data of the mobile phone of accused. But, it is proved that the accused has harassed the victim/PW-6 by way of using mobile phone as per the evidence of Pws.1 to 6, PW-9. Moreover, the victim/PW-6 has also clearly stated that the accused asking her every time that he will marry her and insisted her by making phone calls and also sending messages through his cell phone and harassed her and threatened to kill the parents of the victim/PW-6. Hence, the evidence of Pws.1, 2 and 6 is reliable, believed and is corroborated by the evidence of remaining witnesses. Therefore, considering the entire evidence on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the prosecution has proved the offences alleged against the Accused beyond all reasonable doubt against the Accused.
43 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
35.Here, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has relied upon a citation reported in 1983 AIR 753 of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, wherein their lordships held that:- “On principle the evidence of a victim of sexual assault stands on par with evidence of an injured witness. Just as a witness who has sustained an injury (which is not shown or believed to be self inflicted) is the best witness in the sense that he is least likely to exculpate the real offender, the evidence of a victim of a sex offence is entitled to great weight, absence of corroboration notwithstanding”.
36.Therefore, in the light of the above Judgment of Hon’ble
Supreme Court and in the light of above discussions as well as in the light of evidence of Pws.1 to 14, more particularly, the evidence of victim girl/PW-6, it can be said that the accused has followed the victim girl/PW-6 and contacted the victim girl/PW-6 to foster personal interaction repeatedly in the name of love and marriage, despite a clear indication of disinterest by the victim girl/PW-6 and by editing the photos of the victim girl and kept in the whatsapp status in the mobile phone of the accused, thereby committed the offence of stalking. Further, the accused has also threatened the
PW.1, 2 & 6 to kill them, if they do not perform marriage of
PW-6/victim girl with him, which comes under the definition of criminal intimidation and also the accused has committed sexual harassment upon the victim girl/PW-6 who is a minor. Therefore, the Section 354-D, 506 of IPC and Section 12 of POCSO Act are 44 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
established against the Accused. Therefore, in the light of above detailed discussion of the evidence adduced by the prosecution, the prosecution has proved that the accused has committed the above said offences. Thereby, in view of the said facts and circumstances, it can be said that the prosecution has established the guilt of the accused for the charges under section 354-D, 506 of IPC and Section 12 of POCSO Act beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, the accused is liable for the punishment under section 354-D, 506 of I.P.C., and
Section 12 of POCSO Act.
37.IN THE RESULT, the accused is found guilty for the offences punishable under sections 354-D, 506 of I.P.C., and Section 12 of
POCSO Act., accordingly, he is convicted under section 235 (2) of
Cr.P.C.
Dictated to Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and
pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 30 th day of December,
2022.
Prl. District & Sessions Judge, Peddapalli, FAC: Judge, Fast Track Special Court for Expeditious Disposal of Cases of Rape and Protection of Child against Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, PEDDAPALLI.
45 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
38.The accused is questioned regarding the quantam of sentence to be imposed and the accused has stated he is having old aged father and grandfather and there is no one to take care of them.
Further, he states that his mother died. Hence, prays to take lenient view in imposing the sentence. Taking into consideration of the above facts of the case, no lenient view shall be taken since the offence committed by accused is grave in nature, hence, he is also not entitled for any benefit either under Section 360 of Cr.P.C., or
Probation of Offenders Act. Therefore, the accused is not entitled to any lenient view.
39. The accused is sentenced to UNDERGO RIGOROUS
IMPRISONMENT for a period of THREE (3) YEARS and also to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only) for the
OFFENCE UNDER SECTION 354-D I.P.C., in case of default in payment of fine, he shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of THREE (3) MONTHS.
Further, the Accused is also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of THREE (3) YEARS and also to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only) for the offence under section 506 of I.P.C., in case of default in payment of fine, 46 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
he shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of THREE (3)
MONTHS.
Further, the accused is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of THREE (3) YEARS for the offence under section 12 of POCSO Act., and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand only) in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of TWO (2) MONTHS.
The substantive sentences shall run concurrently.
The remand period which was already undergone by the accused shall be set-off as per Section 428 of Cr.P.C. M.O.1 shall be destroyed after appeal time is over.
Dictated to Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and
pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 30 th day of December,
2022.
Prl. District & Sessions Judge, Peddapalli, FAC : Judge, Fast Track Special Court for Expeditious Disposal of Cases of Rape and Protection of Child against Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, PEDDAPALLI.
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
FOR THE PROSECUTION: FOR THE DEFENCE:
PW-1 Mother of the victim -Nil- 47 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
PW-2 Father of the Victim
PW-3 T.Abhilash
PW-4 T.Rajender
PW-5 T.Prabhakar
PW-6 Victim girl
PW-7 L.Sathyanarayana
PW-8 T.Ravi Kumar
PW-9 K.Partha Saradhi Rao
PW-10 Md.Raheemuddin
PW-11 M.Srinivas
PW-12 B.Vineetha
PW-13 G.Vamshi Krishna
PW-14 S.Laxman
EXHIBITS MARKED
FOR THE PROSECUTION:
Ex.P-1Complaint by PW-1.
Ex.P-2Sec.164 of Cr.P.C., statement of PW-6
Ex.P-3Requisition given by the police to PW-7/Head Master
Ex.P-4Study, conduct and date of birth of the PW-6/victim girl
Ex.P-5Crime Details form
Ex.P-6Requisition of SHO, P.S., Pothakapalli for recording Sec.164 Cr.P.C., statement of PW-6/victim girl Ex.P-7is the CD containing the video recording of Sec.161 Cr.P.C., statement of the victim girl.
Ex.P-8is the relevant portion of the confession-cum-seizure panchanama Ex.P-9 FIR 48 of 48
S.C.No.12 of 2022.
FOR THE DEFENCE: -Nil-
:: MATERIAL OBJECTS ::
M.O.1 is Sumsung Galaxy mobile phone.
Prl. District & Sessions Judge, Peddapalli, FAC :Judge, Fast Track Special Court for Expeditious Disposal of Cases of Rape and Protection of Child against Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, PEDDAPALLI.