Smt.Rachapudi Sreedevi

1 Spl. S.C No. 165 of 2022

IN THE COURT OF THE FAST TRACK SPECIAL SESSIONS JUDGE

FOR EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL AND DISPOSAL OF RAPE AND POCSO ACT

CASES, MAHABUBNAGAR.

Friday, the 29th day of November, 2024

Present:- Smt.Rachapudi Sreedevi,

Judge, Family Court -cum-

III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar. FAC Fast Track Special Sessions Judge, For Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Mahabubnagar.

SPECIAL SESSIONS CASE No.165 of 2022

Between:

The State of Telangana through Police, Jadcherla, Police Station. … Complainant

And

Yerukali Ravi @ Ravinder, S/o. Narsimulu, age 21 years, Caste: Yerukali, Occ: Hotel servant at Banjara hills, R/o. Ananthsagar of Kulkacherla Mandal of Vikarabad District. … Accused

Offences Chargebd.:366, 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 5(l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012.

Plea of the Accused:Pleaded not guilty

Finding of the Court:Found not guilty

Sentence or Order:Accused is found not guilty for the offences punishable under sections 366, 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 5(l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012 and accordingly, he is acquitted under section 235(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused shall stand cancelled after expiry of six months time as contemplated U/Sec.437-A Cr.P.C. The MO.1 (Is the 1+Android mobile phone of accused) which was given to police 2 Spl. S.C No. 165 of 2022 under safe custody shall be confiscated to State after expiry of appeal time. MO.2 (Is the motorcycle HeroHFDeluxebearing No.TS34E6445) which was given to police under safe custody shall be returned to its original owner after expiry of appeal time. The unmarked non-valuable property, if any shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Prosecution conducted by: Sri B.Balaswamy, In-charge Special Public Prosecutor.

Accused defended by: Sri S.Raghavender, Advocate.

*****

This case is coming up before me for hearing on 28-11-2024 in the presence of Sri B.Balaswamy, Incharge Public

Prosecutor for the State and of Sri S.Raghavender, Advocate for the accused and upon perusing the material on record, and having stood over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1.The Inspector of Police, Jadcherla police station has filed charge sheet against the accused in Cr.No.653/2021 for the offences punishable under sections 366(A), 376(2)(n) of IPC and section 5 r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012.

2.The gist of the prosecution case is that :

The LW.3/victim (wh.ose name is not disclosed in view

of the bar U/Sec.228-A of I.P.C and also as guided by the Apex

3 Spl. S.C No. 165 of 2022

Court in 'State of Karnataka Vs. Puttaraja – (2004 (3) ALT (Crl.)

S.C. Page 6 and Nipun Sexana Vs. Union of India, 11 th

December, 2018) is a minor girl aged about 15 years. She was studying Intermediate First year at Vaishnavi Junior College, Jadcherla.

The accused is eking his livelihood as hotel servant at Hyderabad.

About three months back the accused became acquainted as a friend of victim minor girl/LW.3 in instagram (mobile app). Further accused was used to chitchat with the victim minor girl and enticed her with his gullible words and proposed his love, but the victim girl was denied.

Though the accused continued his attitudes and asked the victim to satisfy his lust, but the victim girl/LW.3 was not accepted him and tried to discontinue her further chatting with the accused and she was not responded to accused in mobile calls and instagram. On 20.12.2021 at about 0900 hours when the victim minor girl/LW.3 was at Vaishnavi

Junior college where she is studying, the accused observed and went her and enticed uttering as to have tea etc nearby hotels and kidnapped her by his motorcycle bearing No. TS34E6445 and left for

Hyderabad and stayed in a room of his friend Anji who was not present at the same time. On the next day he took the victim girl to Nizamabad on the same vehicle and after meeting with his friend Suman he returned to Hyderabad and stayed in a rented room at Banjara hills and on 23.12.2021 the accused married the victim minor girl in Yellamma temple by threatening and cohabited in sexual Intercourse with her often. As and when accused was leaving out side he was used to lock 4 Spl. S.C No. 165 of 2022 the doors from outside by keeping the victim girl in the room.

Meantime on 30.12.2021 morning on reliable information the Police along with parents of the victim girl rushed the room of accused and found the victim minor girl in a room of accused and brought back to

Jadcherla. Further on 03.01.2022 when the accused was at RTC new bus stand on his motorcycle the Police arrested him and seized his mobile phone along with motorcycle. Finally the mother of the victim girl i.e., complainant requested to take necessary legal action in this matter according to law.

3.On receipt of above complaint, the LW.16/A.Ramesh Babu, registered a case in Cr.No.653/2021 under section 363 of IPC and entrusted the CD file to LW.15/C.Laxmaiah, Assistant Sub-Inspector of police for further investigation duly dispatching the First Information

Repor to all concerned officials. During the course of investigation the

LW.15/C.Laxmaiah examined and recorded the statements of parents of victim girl i.e., LW.1 and LW.2, visited the scene of offence located at

Vaishnavi Junior College, Jadcherla and in the presence of

LW.7/K.Venkatesh and LW.8/B.Venkataiah conducted the scene of offence panchanama and drew rough sketch of scene in crime detail form.

5 Spl. S.C No. 165 of 2022 3i.On reliable information, on 30.12.2021 the missing girl found at

Hyderabad in a rented room of accused at Bajara hills area. She brought to Police Station, Jadcherla with the assistance of her parents and LW.4/G.Priscilla, Woman Assistant Sub Inspector of police recorded the statement of victim minor girl/LW.3. Basing on the statement of victim girl/LW.3, he altered the section of law into 366(A), 376(2)(n) IPC and section 5 r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012 and dispatched the express section alteration memos to all concerned officials. Later the

LW.16/A.Ramesh Babu, took up further investigation of this case as the offence is grave in nature. Further the victim minor girl/LW.3 sent to medical examination where the LW.11/Dr.G.Swetha examined the victim minor girl/LW.3 and preserved vaginal swabs for CE report which were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory, Hyderabad. Later, he handed over the victim minor girl/LW.3 to her parents and he examined and re- recorded the statements of parents of victim i.e., LW.1 and LW.2, later he examined and recorded the statement of LW.4/G.Priscilla and collected the bonafide certificate of the victim minor girl/LW.3 from the

LW.5/N.Raju as per bonafide certificate the date of birth of victim minor girl/LW.3 is on 27.04.2006. Later he examined and recorded the statement of LW.5/N.Raju.

3ii.On reliable information, on 03.01.2022 at 0700 hours the

LW.16/A.Ramesh Babu, Inspector of police apprehended the accused 6 Spl. S.C No. 165 of 2022 at new bus stand, Jadcherla who was proceeding on his motorcycle which was used by him in the commission of this offence. On interrogation when the accused was about to confess his guilt of offence in this crime and he secured presence of LW.9/Sheik Haji and

LW.10/M.Mohan recorded the confession statement of accused and seized his 1+ android mobile phone which was used by the accused to chitchat with the victim girl/LW.3 along with his motorcycle (Hero HF

Deluxe) bearing No. TS34E6445 as the accused kidnapped away the victim on the same vehicle up to Hyderabad and Nizamabad. Later the accused led the police and mediators to Banjara hills where he was stayed along with victim minor girl and cohabited in sexual intercourse and shown the 2nd scene of offence. In presence of same mediators conducted scene of offence panchanama and drew rough sketch of scene in crime detail form. Further he sent the accused to Government

General Hospital, Mahabubnagar for his potency test where the

LW.12/Dr.Lokesh Chouhan, conducted the potency of accused and furnished report opining that "from the above mentioned objective signs, it can be concluded that there is nothing to suggest that the individual examined is not capable of performing act of sexual intercourse". After completion of investigation he produced the accused before the court for judicial Custody. Further, he examined and recorded the statement of LW.6/B.Naresh.

7 Spl. S.C No. 165 of 2022 3iii.The LW.13/D.Sujyothi Rani, Assistant Director who analysed the vaginal smear slides of the victim minor girl/LW.3 furnished report opining that the item No.1 examined, semen and spermatozoa are not detected on item No.1 vide Forensic Science Laboratory file No.

SER/218/2022, Dt. 28.02.2022. Basing on the Forensic Science

Laboratory report the LW.11/Dr/G.Swetha furnished final opinion opining that "Forensic Science Laboratory No. SER/218/2022, Dt.

28.02.2022, semen & spermatozoa are not detected on item No. 1.

Hence his final opinion is possibility of sexual assault cannot be ruled out". On his requisition, the LW.14/CM.Rajyalaxmi, Additional Judicial

Magistrate of First Class recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C statement

of victim minor girl/LW.3. After completion of investigation he filed charge sheet against the accused.

4.This case was taken on file for the offences under sections 366(A), 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 5 r/w 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 against the accused by the Hon’ble I-Additional District and Sessions

Judge, Mahabubnagar and registered as Special Sessions Case No.165

of 2022 and made over the case to this Court for Trial and Disposal as per law.

5.On the appearance of the accused before the Court, the copies of the documents was furnished to him in compliance of Sec.207 of Cr.P.C.

8 Spl. S.C No. 165 of 2022

6. The Incharge Special Public Prosecutor representing the State and the learned defense counsel appearing on behalf of the accused was heard on the charges. Considering all the material placed by the prosecution, the said Court framed the charges under Sections 366, 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 5(l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012 against accused and the said charges was read over and explained to him under section 228(2) of Cr.P.C and having understood the same, he denied the offences, pleaded not guilty and further claimed to be tried.

The accused is defended by his advocate.

7. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused for the offences alleged against him, the prosecution has examined PWs.1 to 4 and Exs.P1 to P17 and also got marked MO.1 and MO.2.

8. After completion of the prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under Section 313(1)(b) of Cr.P.C by explaining the incriminating material available against him, in the evidence of prosecution witnesses. For which he denied the same and reported no defence evidence.

9. Heard both sides.

10.Now the following points arise for determination:

Whether the prosecution is able to establish the guilt of the accused for the offences punishable Under Sections 366, 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 5(l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012 beyond all reasonable doubt?

9 Spl. S.C No. 165 of 2022

11.POINT:- The evidence of PW.1 who is mother of the victim girl deposed that accused is her son-in-law and accused does not committed any offence against her daughter and he never committed any sexual assault against her daughter nor he kidnapped her daughter. She further deposed in her evidence that they performed marriage of her daughter with accused, after she attaining the age of majority and she does not know any facts of the case and at about three years ago when her daughter went to their relatives house without informing them at that time some of her relatives obtained her signature vide Ex.P1 on some blank papers and she does not know what was written subsequently. During her cross-examination she denied her 161 Cr.P.C statement stated before the police twice as in

Ex.P2 and Ex.P3.

12.The evidence of PW.2 who is father of victim deposed that accused is his son-in-law and accused does not committed any offence against his daughter and he never committed any sexual assault against his daughter nor he kidnapped his daughter. He further deposed in his evidence that they performed marriage of his daughter with accused, after she attaining the age of majority and he does not know any facts of the case. During his cross-examination he denied his 161 Cr.P.C statement stated before the police twice as in Ex.P4 and

Ex.P5.

10 Spl. S.C No. 165 of 2022

13. The evidence of PW.3 who is victim girl deposed that accused is her husband and accused does not committed any offence against her and he never committed any sexual assault against her nor he kidnapped her. She further deposed in her evidence that her parents performed her marriage with accused, after she attaining the age of majority and she does not know any facts of the case and at the instance of her elders she stated before the court and the contents are not correct. During her cross-examination she denied her 161 Cr.P.C statement stated before the police as in Ex.P6.

14.The evidence of PW.4 who is Investigating Officer deposed that on 21-12-2021 at about 09.00 hours, he received a complaint/Ex.P7 from PW.1, basing on it he registered a case in

Cr.No.653/2021 under sections 363 of IPC and issued First Information

Report/Ex.P8 to all concerned and entrusted the CD file to

LW.15/C.Laxmaiah, Assistant Sub-Inspector of police for further investigation and he took up investigation of this case. During the course of investigation LW.15/C.Laxmaiah examined and recorded the statements of PW.1 and PW.2. Later he visited the scene of offence situated at Vaishnavi Junior College, Jadcherla and secured the presence of LW.7/Kethavath Venkatesh and LW.8/Banda Venkataiah

Yadav and conducted scene of offence panchanama and drawn rough sketch in first crime details form vide Ex.P9.

11 Spl. S.C No. 165 of 2022

15. PW.4 further deposed in his evidence that on 30-12-2021, PW.3 was traced at Banjara Hills, Hyderabad in the rented room of accused and she was brought to police station, Jadcherla with the assistance of her parents. Upon the instructions of LW.15/C.Laxmaiah,

LW.4/G.Priscilla, Woman Assistant Sub-Inspector of police examined and recorded the statement of PW.3. Basing on the statement of PW.3,

LW.15/C.Laxmaiah altered the section of law from 363 of IPC to 366(A), 376(2)(n) of IPC and section 5 r/w 6 of POCSO Act and dispatched the same to all concerned officials vide Ex.P10 section alteration memo.

Later he took up the further investigation of this case as the offence was grave in nature. Later he sent PW.3 for medical examination, where LW.11/Dr.G.Swetha, examined PW.3 and issued preliminary report/Ex.P11 and also preserved her vaginal swabs for onward forwarding to Forensic Science Laboratory, Hyderabad for chemical analysis. Later he examined and re-recorded the statements of PW.1 and PW.2 and also examined and recorded the statement of

LW.4/Gaddam Priscilla, Woman Assistant Sub Inspector of police.

16. PW.4 further deposed in his evidence that further he collected the Bonafide Certificate of PW.3/Ex.P12 from LW.5/N.Raju,

Principal of Vaishnavi Junior College, Badepally, Jadcherla and also

examined and recorded the statement of LW.5/N.Raju. As per the

Ex.P12 the date of birth of PW.3 is 27-04-2006. On 31-01-2022 at 07.00 hours on reliable information he apprehended the accused at 12 Spl. S.C No. 165 of 2022 new bus stand, Jadcherla, while the accused was proceeding on his motorcycle and upon interrogation when the accused was about to confess his guilt, he secured the presence of LW.9/Sheik Haji and

LW.10/M.Mohan and prepared confession panchanama and also seized

MO.1 (Is the 1+ android mobile phone of accused) and MO.2 (Is the motorcycle Hero HF Deluxe bearing No.TS34E6445) under the cover of confession-cum-seizure panchanama/Ex.P13.

17. PW.4 further deposed in his evidence that further he along with the accused and same mediators i.e., LW.9/Sheik Haji and

LW.10/M.Mohan visited the second scene of offence situated at Banjara

Hills and identified the scene through the accused and conducted the scene of offence panchanama and drawn rough sketch in second crime details form/Ex.P14. Subsequently, he issued 50, 50-A Cr.P.C notice to the relatives of the accused and issued arrest memo to accused and sent the accused to the Government General Hospital, Mahabubnagar for potency test, where LW.12/Dr.Lokesh Chouhan, Tutor conducted potency test of the accused and furnished potency report/Ex.P15 and opined that “there is nothing to suggest that the individual examined is not capable of performing act of sexual intercourse”, later, the accused was produced before court for judicial custody.

13 Spl. S.C No. 165 of 2022

18. PW.4 further deposed in his evidence that further he also examined and recorded the statement of LW.6/B.Naresh.

LW.13/D.Sujyothi Rani, Assistant Director TS.Forensic Science

Laboratory, Hyderabad examined the material objects and furnished

Forensic Science Laboratory report and opined that “the item no.1 is examined, Semen and Spermatozoa are not detected on item No.1”, basingonForensicScienceLaboratoryreport/Ex.P16

LW.11/Dr.G.Swetha furnished final opinion report/Ex.P17 and she opined that “Possibility of sexual assault cannot be ruled out”. Further on his requisition, LW.14/CM.Rajyalaxmi, Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Shadnagar recorded the 164 Cr.P.C statement of PW.3. After completion of investigation he filed charge sheet against the accused.

19. On careful scrutiny in this case, the main material witnesses i.e., parents of the victim girl and victim girl i.e., PWs.1 to 3 were not stated anything against the accused and they turned hostile by the Incharge

Special Public Prosecutor and they deposed that accused is husband of

PW.3 and accused does not committed any offence against PW.3 and he never committed any sexual assault against PW.3. PW.1 further deposed in her evidence that at about three years ago she when her daughter went to her relatives house without informing them at that time some of her relatives obtained her signature vide Ex.P1 on some blank papers and she does not know what was written subsequently.

PW.3 further deposed in her evidence that her parents performed her 14 Spl. S.C No. 165 of 2022 marriage with accused, after she attaining the age of majority and they does not know any facts of the case and at the instance of her elders she stated before the court and the contents are not correct. There is no evidence against the accused. Hence the Incharge Special Public

Prosecutor given up the evidence of remaining list of witnesses i.e.,

LW.4/G.Priscilla,LW.5/N.Raju,LW.6/Naresh,LW.7/K.Venkatesh,

LW.8/B.Venkatesh, LW.9/Sheik Haji, LW.10/M.Mohan, LW.11/Dr.G.Swetha,

LW.12/Dr.Lokesh Chouhan, LW.13/D.Sujyothi Rani, LW.14/CM.Rajyalaxmi and LW.15/Laxmaiah in this case. Though the evidence of PW.4 deposed about the chronological events conducted by him and also other investigating officers in this crime. None of the material witnesses supported the prosecution case, the evidence of PW.4 who is investigating officer is of no use for the case of prosecution. Hence, the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused for the offences alleged against accused under Sections 366, 376(2)(n) of IPC and

Section 5(l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012.

20. In the result, accused is found not guilty for the offences punishable under sections 366, 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 5(l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012 and accordingly, he is acquitted under section 235(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused shall stand cancelled after expiry of six months time as contemplated U/Sec.437-A Cr.P.C. The

MO.1 (Is the 1+Android mobile phone of accused) which was given to police under safe custody shall be confiscated to State after expiry of 15 Spl. S.C No. 165 of 2022 appeal time. MO.2 (Is the motorcycle Hero HF Deluxe bearing

No.TS34E6445) which was given to police under safe custody shall be returned to its original owner after expiry of appeal time. The unmarked non-valuable property, if any shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open Court, on this the 29th day of November,

2024.

Judge, Family Court-cum- III Addl District

and Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar, FAC, the Fast Track Special Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases,

Mahabubnagar.

A ppendix of Evidence

(Witnesses examined)

On behalf of Prosecution:

PW.1 Mother of the Victim (Identity not disclosed).

PW.2 Father of the Victim (Identity not disclosed).

PW.3 Victim (Identity not disclosed).

PW.4A.Ramesh Babu, Investigating Officer.

On behalf of Defence:

- Nil -

Exhibits marked

On behalf of Prosecution:

Ex.P1 Signature of PW.1 on complaint.

Ex.P2 Portion of 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW.1.

Ex.P3 Portion of 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW.1.

Ex.P4 Portion of 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW.2.

16 Spl. S.C No. 165 of 2022

Ex.P5 Portion of 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW.2.

Ex.P6 Portion of 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW.3.

Ex.P7 Complaint.

Ex.P8 First Information Report.

Ex.P9 First Crime Details Form.

Ex.P10 Section Alteration Memo.

Ex.P11 Preliminary Report.

Ex.P12 Bonafide Certificate of PW.3.

Ex.P13 Confession-cum-Seizure panchanama.

Ex.P14 Second Crime Details Form.

Ex.P15 Potency Report.

Ex.P16 Forensic Science Laboratory report.

Ex.P17 Final Opinion.

On behalf of Defence:

- Nil -

Material Objects marked

MO.1 (Is the 1+Android mobile phone). MO.2 (Is the motorcycle Hero HF Deluxe bearing No.TS34E6445).

Judge, Family Court-cum- III Addl District

and Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar, FAC, the Fast Track Special Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Mahabubnagar.

1 Spl. S.C No.146 of 2022

IN THE COURT OF THE FAST TRACK SPECIAL SESSIONS JUDGE FOR

EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL AND DISPOSAL OF RAPE AND POCSO ACT CASES,

MAHABUBNAGAR.

Friday, the 29th day of November, 2024

Present:- Smt.Rachapudi Sreedevi,

Judge, Family Court -cum-

III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar. FAC Fast Track Special Sessions Judge, For Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Mahabubnagar.

SPECIAL SESSIONS CASE No.146 of 2022

Between:

The State of Telangana through Police, Jadcherla Police Station, Mahabubnagar.

… Complainant

And

Chennarapur Sai Kumar S/o. Narsimulu, Age. 20 years, Caste: Mudhiraj, Occ: Plumber, R/o Malleboinapally village of Jadcherla mandal, now is residing at Old Bazar, Badepally Jadcherla. … Accused

Offences Charged.:376(3) of IPC, section 5 (l) and 5(j)(ii) r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012.

Plea of the Accused:Pleaded not guilty

Finding of the Court:Found not guilty

Sentence or Order:Accused is found not guilty for the offences under sections 376(3) of IPC, section 5 (l) and 5(j)(ii) r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012 and accordingly, accused is acquitted under section 235 (1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled after expiry of appeal time as per section 437-A of

Cr.P.C. The M.O.1 (Jio Keypad mobile 2 Spl. S.C No.146 of 2022 phone connection No.93470204446) which was given interim custody shall be confiscated to the state after expiry of appeal time. The valuable unmarked case propety, if any, shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Prosecution conducted by: Sri B.Balaswamy, Incharge Special Public Prosecutor.

Accused defended by: Sri K.Venkatesh, Advocate

This case is coming up before me for hearing on 29.11.2024 in the presence of Sri B.Balaswamy, Incharge Special Public Prosecutor for the State and of Sri K.Venkatesh, Advocate for the accused and upon perusing the material on record, and having stood over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1. The Inspector of Police, Jadcherla police station has filed charge sheet against sole accused in Cr.No.342/2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 376 (2) (n) (3) of IPC, section 5 r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012.

2.The gist of the prosecution case is that :

The LW.1 is the victim girl (whose name is not

disclosed in view of the bar U/Sec.228-A of I.P.C and also as

guided by the Apex Court in 'State of Karnataka Vs. Puttaraja –

3 Spl. S.C No.146 of 2022

(2004 (3) ALT (Crl.) S.C. Page 6 and Nipun Sexana Vs. Union of

India, 11 th December, 2018)' was a minor girl, aged about 15 years and studying 10th class and resident of Old bazaar Badhepally area

Jadcherta town. The accused pertotas native of Malleboyanmally village of Jadcherla mandal, he is eking his livelihood as plumber by residing at Old bazaar Bited Badhepally. When the Lw.1/victim girl studying 8th class in St.Agnes girls high school Badhepally the accused observed her and used to follow on his motorcycle and expressed his love with the Lw.1/victim girl, but the she was denied.

Further when the Lw1/victim girl was studying 9th class the accused again went the Lw.1 and expressed his love. After few days of above incident the accused went to the school of Lw.1/victim girl and told that, if she didn't love him, he would commit suicide. Then the

Lw.1/victim girl afraid of him and accepted his love. Meantime the accused was given a small phone to Lw.1. Later, accused was used to contact her on her mobile No.9603959866 in the afternoon and night hours. The Lw.2/Peddapuram Indira mother of victim girl was used to visit company work whereas her husband was used to visit hamali work. By taking this an advantage on 01.11.2020 at 12:30 hours accused contacted the Lw1/victim girl and at about 13:00 hours 4 Spl. S.C No.146 of 2022 the accused went the house of Lw.1 in the absent of her family members and he forcibly participated in sexual intercourse with

Lw.1/victim girl and threatened to kill her if she exposed the matter

before anybody. Thus Lw. 1 was afraid of accused person and not

revealed the matter. On the next day accused again visited

Lw.1/victim girl and sexually enjoyed with her. Upon which he continually participated in sexual intercourse with Lw.1/victim girl for five days. When the Lw.1/victim girl informed about her discontinuation of her monthly periods for 3 months the accused neglected and escaped put offing his mobile phone. Later Lw.1/victim girl had given back her mobile to accused. She not revealed the facts

before their family due to afraid of them. About 10 days ago when the

Lw.1 was fell down due to giddiness Lw.2/P.Indira brought her to

Hospital, where the doctors examined Lw.1/victim girl and confirmed her pregnancy stating as she is running 8 month pregnancy. Further on 24.07.2021 the victim minor girl blessed with a female baby. The entire victim minor girl, her baby kid and accused were sent to

Forensic Lab Hyderabad for their Derybonueclic Acid finger printing and all were compared with each other and tallied and it is proved that the baby girl is daughter of accused. Thus the accused had 5 Spl. S.C No.146 of 2022 committed an offence punishable under section 376 (2) (n) (3) IPC and section 5 R/W 6 OF POCSO ACT 2012. Finally, the victim girl/LW1 by stating so, requested to take necessary action.

3. On receipt of above complaint the Lw 15/G.Veeraswamy,

Inspector of Police registered a case in Cr.No. 342/2021 under section 376 (2) (n) IPC and section 5 r/w 6 of POCSO Act and took up the investigation duly dispatching the express First Information

Reports to all concerned including the Hon'ble court.

3.i. During the course of investigation the Lw.5/G.Priscilla who is lady Police officer examined and recorded the statement of Lw.1/vic- tim girl. Further visited the scene of offence located at the house of

Lw.1/victim girl minutely observed the scene and in presence of

Lw.7/B.Bharath Singh and Lw.8/L.Rajesh conducted the scene of of- fence panchanama and drew rough sketch map of scene in crime de- tail form. Further examined and recorded the statements of Lw.3/P.-

Manish, LW4/B.Manemma, LW5/G.Priscilla and Collected the bonafide victificate of Lw.1/victim girl from Lw.6/B.Rose Marry, in which it is noticed that the date of birth of victim minor girl is on 6 Spl. S.C No.146 of 2022 26.08.2006 and whichs runing 14 years 10 months and minor girl.

Sent the victim minor girl to CHC Badhepally for her medical exami- nations where the Lw.11/Dr.Nilofer confirmed that the victim minor girl is carrying pregnant and referred her to Government General Hospital

Mahabubnagar for further examination and not preserved the vaginal swabs for Chemical Examination report.

3.ii.On reliable information on 22.07.2021 at 12:00 hours the

Lw.15/G.Veeraswamy apprehended the accused at Old bus stand

Badhepally area Jadcherla town. On Interrogation when the accused was in mood about to confess his guilty of offence in this crime he se- cured presence of Lw.9/U.Shanker and Lw.10/A.Mahesh recorded the confession statement of accused and seized his mobile phone (Jio keypad mobile connection No. 9347020446) which was used by him in the commission of this offence. Further sent the accused to

Government General Hospital Mahabubnagar for his potency test where the LW.12/Dr.Parvathi conducted the same furnished report opining that "from the above mentioned objective signs it can be con- cluded that there is nothing to suggest that the individual examined is 7 Spl. S.C No.146 of 2022 not capable of performing act of sexual intercourse". Later produced the accused before the Hon'ble court for judicial custody.

3.iii.As per requisition filed by the Lw.15/G.Veeraswamy, the

Lw.14/K.Asha Rani, Judicial Magistrate of First Class recorded the statement of Lw.1/victim girl. Further the Lw. 16/A.Ramesh Babu, In- spector of Police took up further investigation of this case.

3.iv.On 24.07.2021 the victim girl/LW1 was blessed with baby girl. She informed the delay in the Police Station. Hence on 23.11.2021 the victim girl along with her child was sent to Forensic

Lab Hyderabad for their Deoxyribonucleic Acid finger printing to compare with the Deoxyribonucleic Acid finger printing of accused person. Later the accused person also sent to Forensic Lab

Hyderabad for his Deoxyribonucleic Acid finger printing with prior permission of Hon'ble court. The Lw13/Dr.G.Pandu compared the

Deoxyribonucleic Acid finger printings of victim minor girl and her female kid were compared with the Deoxyribonucleic Acid finger printing of accused person and furnished report opining that "The autosomal STR analysis conclusively proves that the 8 Spl. S.C No.146 of 2022

Deoxyribonucleic Acid profile of Chennarapu Sai Kumar (source of item No. 3) is the biological father of the femate child of Peddapuram

Sravya (source of item No. 2). The biological mother of the female child is Peddapuram Sravya (source of item No. 1)" vide FSL

Hyderabad vide file No. DNA/458/2021. DNA/477/2021, Dt.

01.02.2022. Later, after completion of investigation he filed the chargesheet against accused.

4.This case was taken on file for the offences under sections 376(2)(n)(3) of IPC, section 5 r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012 against the sole accused by the Hon’ble I-Additional District and

Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar and registered as Special Sessions

Case No.146 of 2022 and made over the case to this court for trial and disposal as per law.

5.On the appearance of the accused before the Court, the copies of the documents were furnished to him in compliance of

Sec.207 of Cr.P.C.

6.The incharge Special Public Prosecutor representing the

State and the learned defence counsel appearing on behalf of the 9 Spl. S.C No.146 of 2022 accused were heard on the charges. Considering all the material placed by the prosecution, the said Court framed the charges under

Sections 376(3) of IPC, section 5 (l) and 5(j)(ii) r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012 against accused and the said charges were read over and explained to him under section 228 (2) of Cr.P.C and having understood the same, he denied the offences, pleaded not guilty and further claimed to be tried. The accused is defended by his Advocate.

7. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused for the offences alleged against him, the prosecution has examined PW’s.1 to 4 and got marked Exs.P1 to P13.

8. After completion of the prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under Section 313(1)(b) of Cr.P.C by explaining the incriminating material available against him, in the evidence of prosecution witnesses. For which he denied the same and reported no defense evidence.

9. Heard both sides.

10 Spl. S.C No.146 of 2022

10.Now the following points arise for determination:

Whether the prosecution is able to establish the guilt of the accused for the offences punishable Under Sections 376(3) of IPC, section 5 (l) and 5(j)(ii) r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012 beyond all reasonable doubt?

11.POINT:- The evidence of Pw.1 who is victim girl stated in her evidence that accused is her husband and he did not commit any sexual assault against her and and did not kidnapped her. Further, she deposed that, she do not know any facts of the case and her parents performed her marriage with accused after attaining majority and at the instance of his parents she went to police station and signed under EX.P1 on some white papers. During her cross- examination her 161 statement is marked as EX.P2, 164 statement is marked as EX.P3.

12.PW2, mother of the victim girl deposed that accused is her son law and he is no way connected with crime and he never committed any sexual assault against her daughter. Further she deposed that they performed the marriage of PW1 with accused and she do not know any facts of the case. During her cross-examination she denied her 161 Cr.P.C statement stated before the police as in Ex.P4.

11 Spl. S.C No.146 of 2022

13.PW3, who is maternal grand mother of PW1 deposed that, accused is her daughter’s son in law and he is no way connected with the present crime and he never committed any sexual assault against PW1. Further, she deposed that, she do not know any facts of the case and did not examined by the police. During her cross- examination her 161 statement is marked as EX.P5.

14. PW.4 investigation officer deposed that, on 19-07-2021 at about 20.00 hours, Lw.15/G.Veeraswamy, Inspector of Police received a complaint under EX.P6 from Pw.1, basing on it he registered a case in Cr.No.342/2021 under sections 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 5 r/w 6 of PCOSOC Act and issued First Information

Report under EX.P7 to all concerned and he took up investigation of this case.

14.i. PW.4 also deposed that during the course of investigation upon the instructions of Lw.15/G.Veeraswamy,

Lw.5/G.Pricilla, Women Assistant Sub Inspector of Police examined and recorded the statement of Pw.1. Subsequently

Lw.15/G.Veeraswamy examined and recorded the statement of 12 Spl. S.C No.146 of 2022

Pw.2. Further he visited the scene of offence situated at house of

Pw.1, observed the scene minutely, secured the presence of

Lw.7/Bavidi Baharath Singh and Lw.8/Lodla Rajesh and conducted scene of offence panchanama and drawn rough sketch in crime detail form under Ex.P8. Further he also examined and recorded the statement of Pw.3, Lw.3/PeddapuramManisha and also

Lw.5/G.Pricilla.

14.ii. PW.4 also deposed that later Lw.15/G.Veeraswamy,

Inspector of Police collected the Bonafide Certificate of Pw.1 under

EX.P9 from Lw.6/B.Rose Marry. As per Ex.P9 the date of birth of

Pw.1 is 26-08-2006. Later he sent Pw.1 to Government General

Hospital, Mahabubnagar, where Lw.11/Dr.Nilofer examined Pw.2 and issued preliminary report under EX.P10 and also preserved the vaginal swabs for onward forwarding to FSL, Hyderabad for chemical analysis.

14.iii. PW.4 also deposed that on 22-07-2021 at about 12.00 hours on reliable information Lw.15/G.Veeraswamy, Sub Inspector of Police apprehended accused at Old Bus-stand, Badepally and on 13 Spl. S.C No.146 of 2022 interrogation, when accused was about to confess your guilt, he secured the presence of two mediators Lw.9/Udthavath Shanker and Lw.10/Adirala Mahesh and recorded the confession of you accused and also seized M.O.1 (Is the Jio Keypad mobile connection No.9347020446) under the cover of seizure panchanama under EX.P11 and also deposited the same in court

CP.No.99/2023.

14.iv. Later, sent accused to the Government General

Hospital, Mahabubnagar for Potency Test, where Lw.12/Dr.Parvathi examined you accused and conducted potency test and issued potency report and opined that “from the above mentioned objective signs it can be concluded that there is nothing to suggest that the individual examined is not capable of performing act of sexual intercourse” and later sent accused to Judicial custody.

14.v. PW.4 also deposed that as per the requisition of

Lw.15/G.Veeraswamy, Inspector of Police, Lw.14/K.Asha Rani,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Shadnagar recorded the 164 Cr.P.C

statement of Pw.1. Further he took up further investigation of this 14 Spl. S.C No.146 of 2022 case and on 24-07-2021, Pw.2 blessed with baby girl, hence on 23- 11-2021, Pw.2 along with her child was sent to Forensic Lab,

Hyderabad for Deoxyribonuelic Acid finger printing to compare with the Deoxyribonuelic Acid finger printing of accused, later the accused was also sent to Forensic Lab, Hyderabad, where Lw.13/Dr.G.Pandu,

Assistant Director compared the Deoxyribonuelic finger printing of victim minor girl and her female kid with the Deoxyribonuelic Acid finger print of you accused and furnished Deoxyribonuelic Acid report under Ex.P12.

14.vi. Further, basing on the Deoxyribonuelic Acid report

Lw.13/Dr.G.Pandu, Asst. Drirector, Hyderabad issued final opinion report under EX.P13 opening that, “The autosomal STR analysis conclusively proves that you are the biological father of the female child of Pw.2. The biological mother of the female child is Pw.2”. After completion of investigation and collecting all documents he filed charge sheet against you accused.

15.In this case, the evidence of victim girl/Pw.1, Pw2 mother of victim girl, PW3 is maternal grand mother of PW1 deposed that, accused is no way connected with crime and he never committed any 15 Spl. S.C No.146 of 2022 sexual offence against Pw.1. Further, all of them deposed that, the marriage of PW1 performed with accused after PW1 attained age of majority. The Pws.1 to 3 totally turned hostile and not supported the case of prosecution. During their cross-examination they denied their 161 Cr.P.C statements stated before the police as in Exs.P2 to P5.

Though Pw.4 deposed chronological events conducted by him and also the investigating officers in this crime. None of them supported the case of prosecution case, the evidence of Pw.4 who is investigating officer is of no use for the case of prosecution. Hence, the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused, the

Special Public Prosecutor has given up the evidence of remaining witnesses i.e. Lw3/P.Manisha, LW5/G.Priscilla, LW6/B.Rose Marry,

LW7/B.Bharath Singh, LW8/L.Rajesh, LW9/U.Shanker, LW10/Adirala

Mahesh, LW11/Dr.Nilofer, LW12/Dr.Parvathi, LW13/Dr.G.Pandu,

LW14/K.Asha Rani, Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

LW15/G.Veeraswamy, Inspector of Police in this case. Hence the benefit of doubt should go to the accused. Therefore this Court of the opinion that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused for the offences alleged against him under Sections 376(3) of IPC, section 5 (l) and 5(j)(ii) r/w 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.

16 Spl. S.C No.146 of 2022

16. In the result, Accused is found not guilty for the offences under sections 376(3) of IPC, section 5 (l) and 5(j)(ii) r/w 6 of POCSO

Act 2012 and accordingly, accused is acquitted under section 235 (1)

Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled after expiry of appeal time as per section 437-A of Cr.P.C. The M.O.1 (Jio

Keypad mobile phone connection No.93470204446) which was given interim custody shall be confiscated to the state after expiry of appeal time. The valuable unmarked case propety, if any, shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Grade-III, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court, on this the 29th day of November, 2024.

Sd/-

Judge, Family Court-cum- III Addl District

and Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar, FAC, the Fast Track Special Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Mahabubnagar .

A ppendix of Evidence

(Witnesses examined)

On behalf of Prosecution:

Pw.1Victim girl (Identity not disclosed)

Pw.2 Mother of Victim girl (Identity not disclosed)

Pw.3 Grand mother of victim girl (Identity not disclosed)

Pw.4 A.Ramesh Babu, Investigating Officer 17 Spl. S.C No.146 of 2022

On behalf of Defence:

- Nil -

Exhibits marked

On behalf of Prosecution:

Ex.P1 Signature of PW1 on complaint

Ex.P2 161 Cr.P.C statement of Pw.1

Ex.P3 164 Cr.P.C statement of Pw.1

Ex.P4 161 Cr.P.C statement of Pw.2

Ex.P5 161 Cr.P.C statement of Pw.3

Ex.P6 Complaint

Ex.P7 First Information Report

Ex.P8 Crime Detail Form

Ex.P9 Bonafide certificate of PW1

Ex.P10 Preliminary report

Ex.P11 Confession cum seizure panchanama

Ex.P12 DNA report

Ex.P13 Final opinion report

On behalf of Defence:

- Nil -

Material Objects marked

M.O.1 Is the Jio keypad mobile connection No.93470204446.

Sd/-

Judge, Family Court-cum- III Addl District

and Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar, FAC, the Fast Track Special Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Mahabubnagar.

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL SESSIONS JUDGE

AT: MAHABUBNAGAR

Monday, the 22nd day of April, 2024

Present:- Sri B.Papi Reddy Prl. Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar.

S.C.No.14 of 2023

(CR.NO.237/2022 OF PS.Hanwada)

PRC No.4 of 2023 on the file of Special Judicial Magistrate of

First Class, Prohibition and Excise-cum-II-Addl.Junior Civil

Judge, Mahabubnagar.

Committed bySmt. Shirisha Katkojwala, Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Prohibition and Excise-cum- II-Addl.JuniorCivilJudge, Mahabubnagar.

Crime No. & P.S. Cr.No.237/2022, PS.Hanwada

Description of the Accused1. Vanarshi Srinu s/o Chandraiah, age 55 yrs, occ: Begging, r/o Tankara village of Hanwada mandal.

2. Sirisala Narsimulu @ Karrodu s/o Chandrappa, age 49 yrs, occ: Begging, r/o Near Laxmi Narsimha Temple,NewGunj, Mahabubnagar.

3. VanarashiDayamma w/o Papaiah, age 50 yrs, occ: Begging, r/o Tankara village of Hanwada mandal.

ChargeU/Sec.302 r/w 34 and 201 r/w 34 of IPC Plea of the AccusedPleaded not guilty

Finding of the CourtFound not guilty

Sentence or OrderIn the result, Accused No.1 to 3 are found not guilty for the offences 2 of 13 S.C.No.14 of 2023 Dt.22-4-2024 punishable U/Secs.302 r/w 34 and 201 r/w 34 of IPC and accordingly they are acquitted for the said offences u/Sec.235(1) Cr.P.C.

Prosecution conducted by Sri B.Janardhan, Public Prosecutor

Accused defended bySriP.Raghupathi,Legal-Aid Counsel/Advocate for Accused No.1 to 3

This Sessions Case came before me for final hearing on 16-4-2024 in the presence of Sri B.Janardhan, Public Prosecutor for the

State and of Sri P.Raghupathi, Legal-Aid Counsel/Advocate for the

Accused No.1 to 3, upon perusing the material on record, upon hearing the arguments, the Court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1.The Circle Inspector of Police, Mahabubagar Rural laid charge sheet in Cr.No.237/2022 of PS.Hanwada for the offences punishable

U/Secs.302 and 201 r/w 34 of IPC against Accused No.1 to 3.

2.Thecaseof the prosecution is that on 2-11-2022 at 11.00 hours the de-facto complainant PW1 lodged Ex.P1 complaint by stating that they are four male and two female offspring to their parents. At about 30 years back marriage of his second brother Varanasi Papaiah was solemnized with one Dayamma i.e., A3 herein, the couple blessed with one male child by name Venkatesh and two female offspring. About six years ago, his brother Papaiah committed suicide by burns, ever since the death of his brother, A3 was continuing illegal relationship with their villager one Vanrashi Srinu i.e., A1 herein and residing at his home along with her son Vanarashi Venkatesh. The deceased 3 of 13 S.C.No.14 of 2023 Dt.22-4-2024

Venkatesh often used to quarrel with A3 and A1 regarding their illicit relationship. On 1-11-2022 at about 19.00 hours PW1 came to know that A1 picked up quarrel with the deceased Venkatesh regarding stealing of a metal Tumbler. On 2-11-2022 at about 09.00 hours when

A3 was weeping before her house, on enquiry A3 informed that in order to eliminate her son, as he was causing obstacle to their illicit intimacy and also committing thefts, they hatched a plan to kill him. As per their plan night at about 02.00 hours A3 along with A1 and his friend by name Sirisala Narsimulu @ Karrodu i.e., Accused No.2 herein beat her son with sticks indiscriminately and tied his hands, legs with a cloth and thrown him in Mothula Pond which is situated behind the house of

A1. On that PW1 went near to pond and fished out the dead body with the help of villager and observed that hands and legs of the deceased were tired with a cloth, found bleeding to his head, right ear and other parts of the body. Further, PW1 stated that A1 and A3 were killed his brother’s son with the help of A2 for causing obstruction to their illegal relationship. In order to disappearance of the evidence, they threw the dead body in the pond by tying hands and legs with a cloth.

3.That on receipt of the complaint, PW8 registered a case in

Cr.No.237/2022 for the offences U/Secs.302 and 201 r/w 34 of IPC and sent express FIRs to all the concerned officers including PW10.

4.Soon after receipt of express FIR from PW8, PW10 visited the scene of offence situated at Tankara village, examined and recorded 4 of 13 S.C.No.14 of 2023 Dt.22-4-2024 the statement of PW1, secured the presence of two mediators PW5 and

PW6 and conducted scene of offence panchanama and drawn rough sketch of the scene in crime details form, collected blood stains from the wall through cotton swabs and one torn lungi having blood stains.

Further PW10 visited Tank called as “Mothulakunta Cheruvu” situated at the backside of the house of A1 at Tankara village, got photographed the dead body, held inquest over the dead body of the deceased and seized water in a one liter quantity plastic bottle in order to forward the same to FSL, Hyderabad for diatom test and subjected the dead body for postmortem examination, during inquest PW10 examined and recorded the statements of PW1 to PW4, LW4/Gude

Ravi, after completion of postmortem examination seized the cloths of the deceased, one cloth piece, which tied both hands and legs of the deceased by the accused.

5.While the investigation was in progress on 4-11-2022 on receipt of reliable information about the presence of A1 to A3, PW8 along with his staff rushed to Laxmi Narsimha Swamy Temple at New Gunj,

Mahabubnagar and apprehended the A1 to A3 at 0630 hours and brought them to police station and produced before PW10. On interrogation, A1 to A3 voluntarily confessed about their guilt. In furtherance of confession of A1 to A3, A1 lead the police and panchas to his house situated at Tankara village and brought one pestle and one stick, PW10 seized the same under cover of seizure panchanama.

5 of 13 S.C.No.14 of 2023 Dt.22-4-2024

After completion of seizure panchanama, PW10 produced the A1 to A3

before the Court for judicial remand.

6.PW9/Medical Officer held postmortem examination over the dead body of the deceased and preserved viscera and sternum bone of the deceased and forwarded the viscera to FSL, Hyderabad for analysis and report.

7.During the course of further investigation, PW10 forwarded the

Items No.1 to 9 to FSL, Hyderabad for analysis and report.

8.The Director, FSL, Hyderabad analyzed the viscera of the deceased and furnished report stating that “No poisonous substances is found in them”. The Director, FSL, Hyderabad also analyzed the sternum bone and water seized from the tank and furnished report stating that “Similar type of Diatoms are found in both of them”. The

Director, FSL, Hyderabad also analyzed the Items No.1 to 9 and furnished report stating that “human blood is detected on items No.1, 3, 4 and 6, but their blood group could not be determined, blood is not detected on items No.2, 5, 7, 8 and 9. After receipt of FSL report, PW9 furnished final opinion by opining that the cause of death of the deceased was due to “Asphyxia result of Drowning associated with

Multiple injuries”, after completion of entire investigation filed charge sheet against the Accused No1. to 3. Hence, the Charge.

6 of 13 S.C.No.14 of 2023 Dt.22-4-2024

9.The case was taken on file by the Spl.Judicial Magistrate of First

Class, Prohibition and Excise-cum-II-Addl.Junior Civil Judge,

Mahabubnagar for the offences U/Sec.302 and 201 r/w 34 of IPC against the Accused No.1 to 3. On appearance of Accused No.1 to 3, copies of documents as required U/Sec.207 of Cr.P.C were furnished to them. Later the case was committed to this Court since the offences punishable U/Secs.302 r/w 34 and 201 r/w 34 of IPC are exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions. On hearing both sides charges

U/Secs.302 r/w 34 and 201 r/w 34 of IPC were framed against Accused

No.1 to 3, read over and explained to them in Telugu, for which

Accused No.1 to 3 pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

10.During the course of trial, the prosecution examined PWs1 to 10, marked ExsP1 to P18 and exhibited MOs-1 to 9.

11.After closure of the prosecution evidence, Accused No.1 to 3 were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C by explaining the incriminating material found in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, but they denied the same and reported no defence evidence.

12.Heard both sides, gone through the record of evidence, in view of the rival contentions.

13.Now the point that arises for determination is:- 7 of 13 S.C.No.14 of 2023 Dt.22-4-2024

Whether the prosecution is able to prove the charge

against Accused No.1 to 3 for the offences U/Secs.302 r/w 34

and 201 r/w 34 of IPC beyond all reasonable doubt or not?

P O I N T:-

14.The specific case of the prosecution and chargeS framed against the Accused No.1 to 3 is that on the intervening night of 1/2-11-2022 at about 2.00 AM the A1 to A3 committed the murder of Vanarasi

Venkatesh by beating him with pestle and stick and shifted the dead body near to tank called as “Mothulakunta Cheruvu” and thrown the dead body into that tank, thereby caused disappearance of evidence to escape from criminal prosecution for the offences U/Secs.302 r/w 34 and 201 r/w 34 of IPC. Case of the accused is total denial of the prosecution case. Admittedly, there is no direct evidence, but the entire case based on the circumstantial evidence.

15.PW1 is Uncle of the deceased and he lodged complaint Ex.P1.

PW2 to PW4 are the circumstantial witnesses. PW5 and PW6 are the mediators for scene of observation and inquest. PW7 is the mediator for the confession-cum-seizure panchanama. PW9 is the Medical

Officer, who conducted postmortem examination over the dead body of the deceased. PW8 and PW10 are the Investigating Officers, who conducted investigation and filed charge sheet.

16.PW1 deposed that he knows A1 to A3. The deceased Venkatesh is his brother/Papaiah son and son of A3. The deceased was suffering 8 of 13 S.C.No.14 of 2023 Dt.22-4-2024 with fits. He died while swimming in the Motkulakunta lake at about two years back. He gave complaint to the police. He does not know the contents of the complaint. The deceased and accused used to live happily and they never quarreled.

17.PW2 deposed that the deceased died at about two years back.

The deceased was suffering with fits. He died while swimming in the

Motkulakunta lake at about two years back. The deceased and accused used to live happily and they never quarreled.

18.PW3 deposed that the deceased Venkatesh is her brother. A3 is her mother. At about two years back all the three accused beat the deceased and she came to know the same through her relatives. A3 was residing in Tankara and married A1 and she came to know the same but admitted that she did not witness any of the incident but her evidence is only hearsay evidence.

19.PW4 deposed that the deceased Venkatesh died at about two year back. He does not know how he died, he did not see the dead body of the deceased. He does not know anything about this case.

20.PW5 and PW6 are the mediators for the scene of observation and inquest. PW5 deposed that at about two years back police called him to

Gramakanta where police conducted scene of observation and inquest in his presence and in the presence of PW6 and thereafter police taken their signatures. Even though he admitted his signature as Ex.P5 and 9 of 13 S.C.No.14 of 2023 Dt.22-4-2024

Ex.P6 on the crime details form and inquest, but he completely denied the panchanamas. He clearly deposed that police not conducted any scene of observation inquest over the dead body of the deceased.

21.PW6 deposed that he does not know anything about this case.

Police taken his signature about one year four months back, but no panchanama was conducted in his presence. Police also not conducted any inquest over the dead body of the deceased. Even though he admitted his signature as Ex.P7 and Ex.P8 on the crime details form and inquest, but he completely denied the panchanamas. He clearly deposed that police not conducted any scene of observation inquest over the dead body of the deceased.

22.PW1, PW2 and PW4 declared as hostile, on the request of the learned Public Prosecutor as they resiled from the earliest version cross examined but except marking their statements U/Sec.161 of Cr.P.C as

Ex.P2 to Ex.P4, nothing is elicited by the learned Public Prosecutor.

23.PW5 and PW6 are the mediators but they also not chosen to support the prosecution case.

24.PW7 is the mediator for the confession-cum-seizure panchanama, he clearly deposed that at about one and half years back A1 to A3 were present along with CI, A1 to A3 confessed the offence and same is recorded by the CI, thereafter taken his signatures and the signature of

LW9/B.Lalaiah. A1 to A3 stated that they killed the son of Jayamma. He 10 of 13 S.C.No.14 of 2023 Dt.22-4-2024 does not remember the deceased name. Police seized sticks, pestle in their presence. Ex.P9 to Ex.P12 are his signatures on the seizure panchanama and confession of A1 to A3. MO-1 is the pestle and MO-2 is the stick seized by the police, but the confession made in the immediate presence of the police is not to be proved as per Sec.25 of the Indian Evidence Act and it is also not his version that at the disclosure statements of the accused, such MO1 and MO2 are seized.

During the cross examination, it is elicited that police taken his signature at about 6 to 7 places, but he does not remember exactly.

MO1 and MO2 are available anywhere.

25.PW8 is the Sub Inspector of Police, he deposed that on 2- 1-2022 PW1 came to police station and lodged Ex.P1 complaint, basing on the same, he registered a case in Cr.No.237/2022 for the offences punishable U/Secs.302 and 201 r/w 34 of IPC and issued FIR under

Ex.P13, as the offence is grievous, the investigation took up by PW10.

26.PW9 is the Doctor, he deposed that on 2-11-2022 on receipt of requisition from Inspector of Police, Mahabubnagar Rural she conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased. The PME was started at 3.10 M and concluded by 4.30 PM and found ante-mortem injuries No.1 to 31 as mentioned in the PME report Ex.P14. Ex.P15 and

Ex.P16 are the FSL reports and Ex.P17 is the final opinion. The cause of death of the deceased as per the final opinion is Asphyxia as a result of 11 of 13 S.C.No.14 of 2023 Dt.22-4-2024 drowning associated with multiple injuries, the approximate time of death of the deceased was 12 to 18 hours prior to PME.

27.PW10 is the Inspector of Police deposed that he registered the case, conducted investigation, recorded the statements of PW1 to 5, visited scene of offence and conducted scene of observation by preparing the crime details form Ex.P18, collected blood stained cloths, visited tank called as Motulakunta Cheruvu and conducted inquest over the dead body of deceased and seized water in a one liter quantity plastic bottle in order to forwarded the same to FSL, Hyderabad for diatom test, seized the cloths of the deceased. On 4-11-2022 he apprehended the accused and accused confessed the offence and he recorded the same in the presence of mediators PW7 and LW9/Lalaiah, seized MO-3 to MO-9, thereafter produced the accused before the

Court. After completion of entire investigation, he filed the charge sheet.

28.That as seen from the above evidence, no witness supported the prosecution case and the evidence of PW9 Doctor who conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased merely proved that the death of the deceased is homicidal only, for which there is no dispute by the accused, but none of the family members including uncles of the deceased and sister of the deceased PW1 to PW3 are not chosen to support the prosecution case. There is no motive or last seen theory adduced by the prosecution, but PW3 states that all the three accused 12 of 13 S.C.No.14 of 2023 Dt.22-4-2024 beat the deceased and she came to know the same through her relatives by which it cannot be held that the prosecution is able to prove the main ingredients for the grave offence of murder, as such the prosecution is failed to prove any of the ingredients of the charged offences. Hence, this point is answered in favour of the Accused and against the prosecution.

29.In the result, Accused No.1 to 3 are found not guilty for the offences punishable U/Sec.302 r/w 34 and 201 r/w 34 of IPCand accordingly they are acquitted for the said offences u/Sec.235(1)

Cr.P.C. Surety bonds of surety persons and bail bonds of Accused No.1 to 3, if any, shall remain in force for a period of Six months and shall stands cancelled after the expiry of Six months period as contemplated under Section 437(A) Cr.P.C. MO-1 to MO-9 shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Grade-I, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 22nd day of April, 2024.

Prl. Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE:

WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF

PROSECUTION DEFENCE

PW.1Vanarshi Venkatesh-NIL- PW.2Vanarshi Budaiah PW.3P.Jayamma PW.4M.Krishnaiah PW.5K.Yadaiah 13 of 13 S.C.No.14 of 2023 Dt.22-4-2024

PW.6K.Balakistaiah PW.7M.A.Jahangeer PW.8K.Ravi PW.9Dr.M.Tejaswini PW.10J.Rajeshwar Goud

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION

Ex.P1Complaint Ex.P2Sec.161 Cr.P.C statement of PW1 Ex.P3Sec.161 Cr.P.C statement of PW2 Ex.P4Sec.161 Cr.P.C statement of PW4 Ex.P5Signature of PW5 on Crime Details Form Ex.P6Signature of PW5 on Inquest Report Ex.P7Signature of PW6 on Scene of Observation Ex.P8Signature of PW6 on Inquest Report Ex.P9Signature of PW7 on Seizure Panchanama Ex.P10Signature of PW7 on Confession of A1 Ex.P11Signature of PW7 on Confession of A2 Ex.P12Signature of PW7 on Confession of A3 Ex.P13FIR Ex.P14PME Report Ex.P15FSL Report Ex.P16FSL Report Ex.P17Final Opinion Ex.P18Crime Details Form

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE

-NIL-

MATERIAL OBJECTS:

MO-1Pestle MO-2Stick MO-3One Half Lungi with blood stains MO-4Gauze cloth dark brown blood stain MO-5Gauze cloth MO-6One white T-Shirt MO-7One black Nikker MO-8Red Thread MO-9One Amber colour cloth

Prl. Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar.

1 Spl. S.C No. 218 of 2022

IN THE COURT OF THE FAST TRACK SPECIAL SESSIONS JUDGE

FOR EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL AND DISPOSAL OF RAPE AND POCSO ACT

CASES, MAHABUBNAGAR.

Saturday, the 30th day of November, 2024

Present:- Smt.Rachapudi Sreedevi,

Judge, Family Court -cum-

III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar. FAC Fast Track Special Sessions Judge, For Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Mahabubnagar.

SPECIAL SESSIONS CASE No.218 of 2022

Between:

The State of Telangana through Police, Jadcherla, Police Station. … Complainant

And

Yenumula Srinu @ Srinivas, S/o. Yadaiah @ Sailu, age: 28 years, Caste: Mondi, Occ: Auto driver, R/o. H.No.14-100/10, Rajivnagar colony, Kaverammapet, Jadcherla. … Accused

Offences Chargebd.:366, 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 5(l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012.

Plea of the Accused:Pleaded not guilty

Finding of the Court:Found not guilty

Sentence or Order:Accused is found not guilty for the offences punishable under sections 366, 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 5(l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012 and accordingly, he is acquitted under section 235(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused shall stand cancelled after expiry of six months time as contemplated U/Sec.437-A Cr.P.C. The MO.1 (Is Bajaj company auto bearing No.AP22 TA 4470) which was given to 2 Spl. S.C No. 218 of 2022 its original owner as per the orders in

Crl.M.P.No.168/2022, dt.24-08-2022

towards interim custody shall be made absolute after expiry of appeal time. The unmarked non-valuable property, if any shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Prosecution conducted by: Sri B.Balaswamy, In-charge Special Public Prosecutor.

Accused defended by: Sri U.Sathyasheel, Advocate.

*****

This case is coming up before me for hearing on 28-11-2024 in the presence of Sri B.Balaswamy, Incharge Public

Prosecutor for the State and of Sri U.Sathyasheel, Advocate for the accused and upon perusing the material on record, and having stood over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1.The Inspector of Police, Jadcherla police station has filed charge sheet against the accused in Cr.No.170/2022 for the offences punishable under sections 366, 376(3)(n) of IPC and section 3 r/w 4 of

POCSO Act 2012.

2.The gist of the prosecution case is that :

The LW.2/victim (whose name is not disclosed in view

of the bar U/Sec.228-A of I.P.C and also as guided by the Apex

Court in 'State of Karnataka Vs. Puttaraja – (2004 (3) ALT (Crl.)

S.C. Page 6 and Nipun Sexana Vs. Union of India, 11 th

3 Spl. S.C No. 218 of 2022

December, 2018) is a minor girl aged about 16 years. She was studying 9th class at ZPHS Kaverammapet by residing in the house of

LW.4/M.Santhosh at Gangapoor for last 6 months due to the inability of parents of victim girl/LW.1 and LW.3. The victim girl/LW.2 daily used to attend the school arriving from Gangapoor. The accused was married with two wives namely Bheemamma and Anusha and they have children. The accused is eking his livelihood as auto driver by residing at Rajivnagar Kaverammapet Jadcherla and he is cousin of mother of vctim/LW.1. On 10.03.2022 the victim girl/LW.2 came to school at

Kaverammapet by carrying lunch and she ignored to carry plate from

Gangapoor. Due to which in the afternoon the victim girl/LW.2 left for their home at Kaverammapet by seeking permission from Sharada

Bai/LW.6 to have lunch and went to home. After having lunch when the accused was leaving towards school the victim girl/LW.2 asked him to lift him up to school, but the accused was denied. Further the accused preplanned to enjoy sexually with the victim girl/LW.2 as his first wife got recently tubectomy operation where as his second wife recently delivered with baby girl and he is unable to sleep with his wives for enjoyments. When after victim girl/LW.2 reaching Kalamma kiranam shop by walk at about 14.30 hours the accused met her and took her into his auto No. AP22TA4470 and went to Choudeshwari temple area brambles towards Udandapoor road Jadcherla limits and the accused forcibly committed rape on the victim minor girl and threatened to not expose the matter with anybody. Later the accused took back the 4 Spl. S.C No. 218 of 2022 victim minor girl to school and after leaving her the accused was escaped. On the same day evening after returning to home at

Gangapoor when the victim girl/LW.2 informed the incident facts with

M.Santhosh/LW.4, he shocked and tried to inform the same to parents of the victim girl/LW.1 and LW.3 but their phones were not worked. On 11.03.2022 the M.Santhosh/LW.4 informed the same facts to mother of the victim/LW.1 over phone. Then the parents of the victim girl went to

Gangapoor and learnt the facts with victim girl/LW.2 and came to

Police Station, Jadcherla. Finally the mother of the victim girl i.e., complainant requested to take necessary legal action in this matter according to law.

3.On receipt of above complaint, the A.Ramesh Babu, Inspector of police/LW.16 registered a case in Cr.No. 170/2022 under sections 366, 376(3) of IPC and section 3 r/w 4 of POCSO Act 2012 and took up investigation duly dispatching the express FIR to all concerned officials.

During the course of investigation he examined and recorded the statement of mother of the victim/LW.1, whereas G.Priscilla/LW.5 recorded the statement of victim minor girl/LW.2 and sent the victim minor girl to Community Health Centre, Badhepally for her medical examination. The Dr.Swetha/LW.12 examined the victim minor girl/LW.2 and preserved vaginal swabs for CE report at Forensic

Science Laboratory, Hyderabad which were forwarding to Forensic 5 Spl. S.C No. 218 of 2022

Science Laboratory, Hyderabad for CE report. Further he examined and recorded the statements of father of victim/LW.3 and M.Santhosh/LW.4, visited the scene of offence situated behind Choudeshwari temple at

Bandameedipally road Kaverammapet limits of Jadcherla and conducted the scene of offence panchanama and drew rough sketch of scene in crime detail form in presence of M.Krishna Kumar/LW.8 and

Y.Jagan/LW.9. The LW.16/A.Ramesh Babu, Inspector of police examined and recorded the statement of LW.5/G.Priscilla, Woman Assistant Sub-

Inspector of police that who examined and recorded the statement of victim girl/LW.2. Further, on his requisition LW.15/CM.Rajyalaxmi,

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Shadnagar recorded under section

164 Cr.P.C statement of victim girl/LW.2. Later he visited ZPHS

Kaverammapet examined and recorded the statement of LW.6/Sharada

Bai. Further he collected the bonafide certificate of LW.2/victim girl from LW.7/Syed Mohinuddin in which the date of birth of victim minor girl is on 01.01.2008. Later he recorded the statement of LW.7/Syed

Mohinuddin.

3i.On reliable information on 15.02.2022 at 0900 hours the

A.Ramesh Babu, Inspector of police/LW.16 apprehended the accused person at Kaverammapet auto stand along with his auto which was used by him in the commission of this offence to kidnapped the victim girl. On interrogation when the accused was about to confess his guilt 6 Spl. S.C No. 218 of 2022 of offence in this crime and he secured presence of Sheik Haji/LW.10 and Dr.Parvathi/LW.11 recorded the confession statement of accused and seized his auto. Further informed the grounds of his arrest to himself and his mother serving notices u/s 50 and 50 (A) (1) Cr.PC and sent the accused to Government General Hospital, Mahabubnagar for his potency test where the Dr.Parvathi/LW.14 conducted the potency of accused and report and furnished opining that "from the above mentioned objective signs it can be concluded that there is nothing to

Suggest that the individual is not capable of performing act of sexual intercourse". After completion of investigation he arrested the accused and produced before the court for judicial custody.

3ii.The LW.13/Dr.Sheik Haseena Parveen analysed the vaginal swabs of the victim minor girl/LW.2 and furnished report opining that "the item no 1 is examined, human semen and spermatozoa are detected on item no.1" vide Forensic Science Laboratory file No.

SER/571/2022, Dt. 07.04.22. Basing on CE report the Dr.Swetha/LW.12 who was examined the victim girl furnished final opinion opining that "Human semen and spermatozoa are detected on item No.1". After completion of investigation he filed charge sheet against the accused.

4.This case was taken on file for the offences under sections 366, 376(3)(n) of IPC and Section 3 r/w 4 of POCSO Act, 2012 against the 7 Spl. S.C No. 218 of 2022 accused by the Hon’ble I-Additional District and Sessions Judge,

Mahabubnagar and registered as Special Sessions Case No.218 of 2022 and made over the case to this Court for Trial and Disposal as per law.

5.On the appearance of the accused before the Court, the copies of the documents was furnished to him in compliance of Sec.207 of Cr.P.C.

6. The Incharge Special Public Prosecutor representing the State and the learned defense counsel appearing on behalf of the accused was heard on the charges. Considering all the material placed by the prosecution, the said Court framed the charges under Sections 366, 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 5(l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012 against accused and the said charges was read over and explained to him under section 228(2) of Cr.P.C and having understood the same, he denied the offences, pleaded not guilty and further claimed to be tried.

The accused is defended by his advocate.

7. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused for the offences alleged against him, the prosecution has examined PWs.1 to 4 and Exs.P1 to P13 and also got marked MO.1.

8. After completion of the prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under Section 313(1)(b) of Cr.P.C by explaining the incriminating material available against him, in the evidence of 8 Spl. S.C No. 218 of 2022 prosecution witnesses. For which he denied the same and reported no defence evidence.

9. Heard both sides.

10.Now the following points arise for determination:

Whether the prosecution is able to establish the guilt of the accused for the offences punishable Under Sections 366, 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 5(l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012 beyond all reasonable doubt?

11.POINT:- The evidence of PW.1 who is mother of the victim girl deposed that accused is her brother and accused is no way connected with crime and he never committed any sexual assault against her daughter nor he kidnapped her daughter and she does not know any facts of the case. She further deposed in her evidence that at about two years ago her daughter went to their relatives house without informing them, due to which on the instance of their village elders she foisted a report and police obtained her signature vide Ex.P1 on some blank paper and she does not know what was written subsequently.

During her cross-examination she denied her 161 Cr.P.C statement stated before the police as in Ex.P2.

12.The evidence of PW.2 who is father of victim deposed that accused is his brother-in-law and accused is no way connected with crime and he never committed any sexual assault against his daughter nor he kidnapped his daughter and he does not know any facts of the 9 Spl. S.C No. 218 of 2022 case. During his cross-examination he denied his 161 Cr.P.C statement stated before the police twice as in Ex.P3.

13. The evidence of PW.3 who is victim girl deposed that accused is her maternal uncle and accused is no way connected with crime and he never committed any sexual assault against her nor he kidnapped her and he does not know any facts of the case. She further deposed in her evidence that at the instance of her elders she stated

before the court and the contents are not correct. During her cross-

examination she denied her 161 Cr.P.C statement stated before the police as in Ex.P4.

14.The evidence of PW.4 who is Investigating Officer deposed that on 11.03.2022 at about 20.00 hours, he received a complaint/Ex.P5 from PW.1, basing on it he registered a case in

Cr.No.170/2022 under sections 366, 376(3) of IPC and Sec.3 r/w 4 of

POCSO Act 2012 and issued FIR/Ex.P6 and he took up the investigation of this case. During the course of investigation he examined and recorded the statement of PW.1 and upon his instructions

LW.5/G.Pricilla, Woman Assistant Sub Inspector of police examined and recorded the statement of PW.3 and sent the PW.3 to Community

Health Centre, Badepally for her medical examination, where

LW.12/Dr.G.Swetha, Civil Assistant Surgeon examined the PW.3 and 10 Spl. S.C No. 218 of 2022 issued preliminary report/Ex.P7 and also preserved her vaginal swabs for onward forwarding to Forensic Science Laboratory, Hyderabad for chemical analysis.

15. PW.4 further deposed in his evidence that further he examined and recorded the statement of PW.2 and LW.4/Meenugan

Santhosh. Later he visited the scene of offence situated behind

Choudeshwari temple, Bandameedipally road Kaverammapet limits of

Jadcherla town which was shown by PW.3, secured the presence of

LW.8/M.Krishna Kumar and LW.9/Yenumula Jagan and conducted scene of offence panchanama and drawn rough sketch in crime details form vide Ex.P8. Later he also examined and recorded the statement of LW.5/G.Pricilla, Woman Assistant Sub Inspector of police.

Further he collected the Bonafide certificate of PW.3/Ex.P9 from

LW.7/Syed Mohinuddin, head master of ZPHS Kaverammapet,

Jadcherla and also examined and recorded the statement of

LW.7/Syed Mohinuddin. As per the Ex.P9 the date of birth of PW.3 is 01-01-2008.

16. PW.4 further deposed in his evidence that on 15-02-2022 at 09.00 hours on reliable information he apprehended the accused at

Kaverammpet auto stand along with his auto and upon interrogation when the accused was about to confess his guilt, he secured the presence of LW.10/Sheik Haji and LW.11/Inayath and prepared 11 Spl. S.C No. 218 of 2022 confession panchanama and also seized MO.1(Is Bajaj company auto bearing No.AP22 TA 4470) under the cover of confession-cum-seizure panchanama vide Ex.P10. Later MO.1 was deposited in the court vide

CP.No.155/2022. Subsequently, he issued 50, 50-A Cr.P.C notice to the relatives of the accused and issued arrest memo to the accused and sent the accused to the Government General Hospital, Mahabubnagar for potency test, where LW.14/Dr.Parvathi, Professor and HOD conducted potency test of the accused and furnished potency report/Ex.P11 and opined that “from the above mentioned objectives signs it can be concluded that there is nothing to suggest that the individual examined is not capable of performing act of sexual intercourse”, later, the accused was produced before the court for judicial custody.

17. PW.4 further deposed in his evidence that LW.13/Dr.Sheik

Haseen Parvin, Assistant Director TS.Forensic Science Laboratory,

Hyderabad examined the material objects and furnished Forensic

Science Laboratory report and opined that “the item no.1 is examined, human semen and spermatozoa are detected on item No.1”, basing on

Forensic Science Laboratory report/Ex.P12 LW.12/Dr.Swetha furnished final opinion report/Ex.P13 and she opined that “Possibility of sexual assault cannot be ruled out”. Further upon his requisition, LW.15/CM

Rajyalaxmi, Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Shadnagar recorded the 12 Spl. S.C No. 218 of 2022 164 Cr.P.C statement of PW.3. After completion of investigation he filed charge sheet against the accused.

18. On careful scrutiny in this case, the main material witnesses i.e., parents of the victim girl and victim girl i.e., PWs.1 to 3 were not stated anything against the accused and they turned hostile by the Incharge

Special Public Prosecutor and they deposed that accused is no way connected with crime and he never committed any sexual assault against PW.3. PW.1 further deposed in her evidence that at about two years ago her daughter went to her relatives house without informing them, due to which on the instance of their village elders she foisted a report and police obtained her signature vide Ex.P1 on some blank papers and she does not know what was written subsequently. There is no evidence against the accused. Hence the Incharge Special Public

Prosecutor given up the evidence of remaining list of witnesses i.e.,

LW.4/M.Santhosh, LW.5/G.Priscilla, LW.6/Sharada Bai, LW.7/Syed

Mohinuddin, LW.8/M.Krishna Kumar, LW.9/Y.Jagan, LW.10/Sheik Haji,

LW.11/Md.Inayath, LW.12/Dr.Swetha, LW.13/Dr.Sheik Haseena Parveen,

LW.14/Dr.Parvathi and LW.15/CM.Rajyalaxmi in this case. Though the evidence of PW.4 deposed about the chronological events conducted by him and also other investigating officers in this crime. None of the material witnesses supported the prosecution case, the evidence of

PW.4 who is investigating officer is of no use for the case of prosecution. Hence, the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the 13 Spl. S.C No. 218 of 2022 accused for the offences alleged against accused under Sections 366, 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 5(l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012.

19. In the result, accused is found not guilty for the offences punishable under sections 366, 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 5(l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012 and accordingly, he is acquitted under section 235(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused shall stand cancelled after expiry of six months time as contemplated U/Sec.437-A Cr.P.C. The

MO.1 (Is Bajaj company auto bearing No.AP22 TA 4470) which was given to its original owner as per the orders in Crl.M.P.No.168/2022, dt.24-08-2022 towards interim custody shall be made absolute after expiry of appeal time. The unmarked non-valuable property, if any shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open Court, on this the 30th day of November,

2024.

Judge, Family Court-cum- III Addl District

and Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar, FAC, the Fast Track Special Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases,

Mahabubnagar.

A ppendix of Evidence

(Witnesses examined)

On behalf of Prosecution:

PW.1 Mother of the Victim (Identity not disclosed).

PW.2 Father of the Victim (Identity not disclosed).

PW.3 Victim (Identity not disclosed).

PW.4A.Ramesh Babu, Investigating Officer.

14 Spl. S.C No. 218 of 2022

On behalf of Defence:

- Nil -

Exhibits marked

On behalf of Prosecution:

Ex.P1 Signature of PW.1 on complaint.

Ex.P2 Portion of 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW.1.

Ex.P3 Portion of 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW.2.

Ex.P4 Portion of 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW.3.

Ex.P5 Complaint.

Ex.P6 First Information Report.

Ex.P7 Preliminary Report.

Ex.P8 Crime Details Form.

Ex.P9 Bonafide Certificate of PW.3.

Ex.P10 Confession-cum-Seizure panchanama.

Ex.P11 Potency Report.

Ex.P12 Forensic Science Laboratory report.

Ex.P13 Final Opinion.

On behalf of Defence:

- Nil -

Material Objects marked

MO.1 (Is Bajaj company auto bearing No.AP22 TA 4470).

Judge, Family Court-cum- III Addl District

and Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar, FAC, the Fast Track Special Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Mahabubnagar.

1 Spl. S.C No.215 of 2021

IN THE COURT OF THE FAST TRACK SPECIAL SESSIONS JUDGE FOR

EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL AND DISPOSAL OF RAPE AND POCSO ACT CASES,

MAHABUBNAGAR.

Friday, the 29th day of November, 2024

Present:- Smt.Rachapudi Sreedevi,

Judge, Family Court -cum-

III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar. FAC Fast Track Special Sessions Judge, For Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Mahabubnagar.

SPECIAL SESSIONS CASE No.215 of 2021

Between:

The State of Telangana through Police, Jadcherla Police Station, Mahabubnagar.

… Complainant

And

Bellam Manjunath @ Pavan S/o. Chennaiah, Age. 22 years, Caste: SC- Madiga, Occ: Auto Driver, R/o Nekkonda village of Jadcherla mandal. … Accused

Offences Charged.:366, 376 (2) (n) of IPC, section 5 (l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012.

Plea of the Accused:Pleaded not guilty

Finding of the Court:Found not guilty

Sentence or Order:Accused is found not guilty for the offences under sections 366, 376 (2) (n) of IPC, section 5 (l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012 and accordingly, accused is acquitted under section 235 (1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled after expiry of appeal time as per section 437-A of

Cr.P.C. The M.O.1 (Honour android mobile phone) confiscated to the state after expiry 2 Spl. S.C No.215 of 2021 of appeal time. The valuable unmarked case propety, if any, shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Prosecution conducted by: Sri B.Balaswamy, Incharge Special Public Prosecutor.

Accused defended by: Sri A.Jagan Yadav, Advocate

This case is coming up before me for hearing on 25.10.2024 in the presence of Sri B.Balaswamy, Incharge Special Public Prosecutor for the State and of Sri A.Jagan Yadav, Advocate for the accused and upon perusing the material on record, and having stood over for consideration till this day, the court delivered the following:-

J U D G M E N T

1. The Inspector of Police, Jadcherla police station has filed charge sheet against sole accused in Cr.No.81/2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 366-A, 376 (2) (n) of IPC, section 5 r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012.

2.The gist of the prosecution case is that :

The LW.2 is the victim girl (whose name is not

disclosed in view of the bar U/Sec.228-A of I.P.C and also as

guided by the Apex Court in 'State of Karnataka Vs. Puttaraja –

(2004 (3) ALT (Crl.) S.C. Page 6 and Nipun Sexana Vs. Union of

India, 11 th December, 2018)' was a minor girl, aged about 17 years 3 Spl. S.C No.215 of 2021 and studying intermediate 2nd year at Government Girls Junior college

Badhepally. The accused person is their villager and he is eking his livelihood as auto driver. The accused was used to visit the agriculture fields of the Lw.1/Kummari Pentaiah to transport the vegetables from Nekkonda to Jadcherla. Meantime the accused found the Lw.2/victim girl and started to chit chat with her in the absence of her parents. For last few months the accused used to follow the Lw.2/victim girl on the name of love and asked her to love him. But the Lw.2/victim girl was denied clearly stating as she is minor and wants to continue her educations. Though the accused harassed the Lw.2/victim girl enticing with his gullible words and assured to marry her. Once when Lw.2/victim gril was denied the love of accused, he stated as he would commit suicide if she not loved him and threatened. Then the Lw.2/victim gril agreed him and subsequently accused had given his phone number 9346501689 after collecting her phone number 6303075615. Often they used to chit chat over phone calls. On 24.02.2021 Manjunatha/accused visited the college at Badhepally and met the Lw.2/victim girl and instructed to meet him on 26.02.2021 as he would marry her and enticed.

Accordingly on 26.02.2021 the Lw.2/victim girl left from her home on 4 Spl. S.C No.215 of 2021 the plea of attending college classes and met the accused at Siganal gadda Badhepally. From there the accused took her to

Munirangaswamy temple at Boothpur and tied thali in her neck and went to Ramnagar Hyderabad and stayed in a room where sexually enjoyed frequently and accused removed his earlier phone number

SIM and tore to conceal their presence and purchased another one

SIM card which number 8639575378. Further the Lw.2/victim girl traced on 06.03.2021 and brought to Police Station Jadcherla and handed over to Lw.1/Kummari Pentaiah after her medical examination. Thus, the accused had committed an offence punishable u/s 366 (A), 376 (2) (n) IPC and section 5 r/w 6 of POCSO

Act 2012. Finally, fathr of victim girl/LW1/Kummari Pentaiah by stating so, requested to take necessary action.

3. On receipt of above complaint Lw.14/S.Jayaprasad, Sub

Inspector of Police registered a case in Cr.No. 81/2021 under section 363 IPC and took up the investigation duly dispatching the First

Inormation Report to all concerned including the Hon'ble court.

3.i.During the course of investigation the Lw.14/S.Jayaprasad ex- amined and recorded the statement of Lw.1/K.Pentaiah and dis- 5 Spl. S.C No.215 of 2021 patched the lookout notices to all to locate the missing girl and trace out the accused person. Further visited the scene of offence located at the house of Lw.1/K.Pentaiah and minutely observed the scene and in presence of Lw.6/H.Balakrishna and Lw.7/Chella Yadagiri con- ducted the scene of offence panchanama and drew rough sketch map of scene in crime detail form.

3.ii.On 06.03.2021 the victim girl/Lw. 2 found at Hyderabad by crime party Police. Further she along with her father/Lw.1/K.Pentaiah brought to PS Jadcherla. Later, Lw.4/G.Priscilla, Women Sub Inspec- tor of Police examined the victim minor girl. Basing on the statement of victim girl Lw.14/S.Jayaprasad altered the section of law from 363

IPC to 366(A), 376 (2) (n) IPC Section 5 r/w 6 of POCSO Act and dis- patched the section alteration memos to all concerned officers includ- ing the Hon'ble court for further legal action accordingly against the accused person. Further the Lw.15/G.Veeraswamy, Inspector of Po- lice resumed the investigation of this case as the offence is grave in nature.

3.iii. The Lw15/G.Veeraswamy sent the victim minor girl to CHC

Badhepally for medical examination where the Lw.10/Dr.Nilofer ex- 6 Spl. S.C No.215 of 2021 amined the victim minor giri and preserved vaginal swabs for Chemi- cal Examination report and sent the same to Forensic Lab where the

LW12/G.Swarna Rani analysed the vaginal swabs of victim minor girl furnished report opining that "the Item No. 1 is examined, Semen and spermatozoa are detected on item No. 1" vide FSL No SER/ 597/2021, Dt. 30.06.2021. Basing on the Chemical Examiantion re- port the Lw.10/Dr.Nilofer furnished final opinion opining that "Human semen and spermatozoa detected on Item No. 1. As per Forensic Re- port there is evidence of recent act of sexual intercourse but cannot find confirmation that is forcible or willingly". Further the Lw.15/

G.Veeraswamy collected the 164 Cr.PC statement of victim minor girl from the LW13/K.Asha Rani, Judicial Magistrate of First Class in which the victim girl corroborated her earlier statement deposed be- fore the Police.

3.iv.The Lw.15/G.Veeraswamy examined and rerecorded the statements of Lw.1/K.Pentaiah and examined and recorded the state- ments of Lw.3/K.Balamani and Lw.4/G.Priscilla. Later, he collected the bonafide certificate of victim girl from Lw.5/Naseem Fathima. On reliable information on 08.03.2021 at 05:00 hours the Lw.15/ 7 Spl. S.C No.215 of 2021

G.Veeraswamy apprehended the accused person at Signal gadda

Badhpally Jadcherla. On interrogation when the accused was in mood about to confess his guilty of offence in this crime, thus se- cured presence of Lw.8/G.Srinivasulu and Lw.9/K.Achary recorded the confession statement of accused and seized his honour android mobile phone which was used by the accused to chitchat with the Lw.

2/victim gril and having their joint photos in the mobile phone. The same mobile phone deposited in the Hon'ble court and later cond- cuted 2nd scene of offence at Ramnagar Hyderabad where the sexu- ally enjoyed with the Lw2/victim girl and shown the place. Further sent the accused for his potency test but medical officer was not present at Government General Hospital Mahabubnagar. Thus pro- duced the accused before the Hon'ble court for judicial Custody. Later the accused's potency test was conducted by the Lw.11/Dr.Sainath intern who furnished the potency test report opining that "from the above mentioned objective signs, it can be concluded that there is nothing to suggest that the individual examined is not capable of per- forming act of sexual intercourse". Later after completion of further in- vestigation filed the chargesheet against the accused.

8 Spl. S.C No.215 of 2021

4.This case was taken on file for the offences under sections 366(A), 376(2) of IPC, section 5 r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012 against the sole accused by the Hon’ble I-Additional District and

Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar and registered as Special Sessions

Case No.215 of 2021 and made over the case to this court for trial and disposal as per law.

5.On the appearance of the accused before the Court, the copies of the documents were furnished to him in compliance of

Sec.207 of Cr.P.C.

6.The incharge Special Public Prosecutor representing the

State and the learned defence counsel appearing on behalf of the accused were heard on the charges. Considering all the material placed by the prosecution, the said Court framed the charges under

Sections 366, 376 (2) (n) of IPC, section 5 (l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012 against accused and the said charges were read over and explained to him under section 228 (2) of Cr.P.C and having understood the same, he denied the offences, pleaded not guilty and further claimed to be tried. The accused is defended by his Advocate.

9 Spl. S.C No.215 of 2021

7. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused for the offences alleged against him, the prosecution has examined PW’s.1 to 4 and got marked Exs.P1 to P16 and M.O.1.

8. After completion of the prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under Section 313(1)(b) of Cr.P.C by explaining the incriminating material available against him, in the evidence of prosecution witnesses. For which he denied the same and reported no defense evidence.

9. Heard both sides.

10.Now the following points arise for determination:

Whether the prosecution is able to establish the guilt of the accused for the offences punishable Under Sections 366, 376 (2) (n) of IPC, section 5 (l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012 beyond all reasonable doubt?

11.POINT:- The evidence of Pw.1 who is father of the victim girl deposed that accused is no way connected with crime and neither he committed any sexual assault against his daughter nor kidnapped her. Further he deposed that he do not know any facts of the case and on day his daughter went to college and from there to her friends 10 Spl. S.C No.215 of 2021 house without informing them, thus at the instance of village elders he foisted a report under EX.P1 and he do not the contents of complaint.

During his cross-examination he denied his 161 Cr.P.C statement stated before the police as in Ex.P2, P3.

12.PW2, victim girl stated in her evidence that accused is her husband and he did not commit any sexual assault against her and and did not kidnapped her. Further, she deposed that, she do not know any facts of the case and at the instance of police she stated

before the court, the contents are not correct. During her cross-

examination her 161 statement is marked as EX.P4.

13.The Pw.3, who is mother of the victim girl deposed that accused is no way connected with the present crime and he never committed any sexual assault against her daughter nor kidnapped her daughter. Further, she deposed that, she do not know any facts of the case and did not examined by the police. During her cross- examination her 161 statement is marked as EX.P5.

14. The evidence of Pw.4 who is investigating officer stated that on 28.02.2021 at about 17:00 hours, Lw.14/S.Jayaprasad, Sub-Inspector 11 Spl. S.C No.215 of 2021 of Police received a complaint from Pw.1 vide EX.P6 basing on it he registered a case in Cr.No.81/2021 under sections 363 of IPC and issued First Information Report under Ex.P7 and he took up investigation of this case.

14.i. PW.4 also deposed that Lw.14/S.Jayaprasad examined and recorded the statement of Pw.1. Later visited the scene of offence situated at the house of PW1 at Nekonda village and in the presence of two mediators Lw.6/Hytharamoni Balakrishna and

Lw.7/Chella Yadagari and conducted 1st scene of offence panchanama and drawn rough sketch in crime detail form. Ex.P8 is the 1st Crime Detail Form.

14.ii. PW.4 also deposed that on 06.03.2021 PW2 was found by Hyderabad Police, and PW1 along with PW2 came to Police

Station Jadcherla and Lw.4/G.Pircilla, Women Assistant Sub

Inspector of Police examined and recorded the statement of Pw.2.

Basing on the statement of Pw.2, Lw.14/S.Jayaprasad altered the section of law under EX.P9 U/sec from 363 of IPC to section 366-A, 376 (2)(n) of IPC and Sec.5 r/w 6 of POCSO Act 2012 to the 12 Spl. S.C No.215 of 2021 existing 363 of IPC and dispatched the same to all concerned official vide Ex.P9.

14.iii. PW.4 also deposed that further he took up the investigation and sent PW2 to to CHC Badepally, where

LW10/Dr.Nilofar examined her and issued preliminary report under

EX.P10 and preserved vaginal swabs for chemical examination report. Further, LW12/G.Swarna Rani Director of Forensic Lab analyzed the same and issued Forensic Lab report under EX.P11 opening that, “the item No.1 is examined, semen and spermatozoa are detected on item No.1.” Later, basing on Forensic Lab report

LW10/Dr.Nilofar issued final report under EX.P12 opening that, recent act of sexual intercourse but cannot find confirmation that is forcible or willingly.

14.iv.PW.4 also deposed that he filed the requisition before

LW13/K.Asha Rani, Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Shadnagar to record the statement of PW2 under section 164 of Cr.P.C and recorded the statement of PW1 and further collected the bonafide 13 Spl. S.C No.215 of 2021 certificate of PW2 from Lw5/Naseem Fathima under EX.P13 in which date birth of PW2 is 03.09.2003.

14.v. PW.4 also deposed that on 08.03.2021 at 05:00 hours apprehended accused at Signal Gadda Badepally, Jadcherla and on interrogation admitted guilt, thus secure the presence of two mediators LW8/Gangapuram Srinivasulu, LW9/Kammari Achary and seized Mo.1 (Honour android mobile phone) under confession sum seizure panchanama EX.P14. Later, he along with accused visited the 2nd scene of offence at Ramnagar Hyderabad in the presence of

LW8/Gangapuram Srinivasulu, LW9/Kammari Achary and conducted 2nd scene of offence panchanana and drawn rough sketch under EX.P15 and later sent the accused to Government

General Hospital, Mahabubnagar, who conducted potency test and issued report under EX.P16 and later sent you accused to judicial custody. After completion of further investigation he filed chargesheet against accused.

15.In this case, the evidence of victim girl/Pw.2, Pw1, 2 parents of victim girl deposed that, accused is no way connected with crime and 14 Spl. S.C No.215 of 2021 he never committed any offence against Pw.2. Further, all of them deposed that, accused is no way connected with the crime and he did not commit any sexual assault against PW2. The Pws.1 to 3 totally turned hostile and not supported the case of prosecution. During their cross-examination they denied their 161 Cr.P.C statements stated

before the police as in Exs.P2 to P5. Though Pw.4 deposed

chronological events conducted by him and also the investigating officers in this crime. None of them supported the case of prosecution case, the evidence of Pw.4 who is investigating officer is of no use for the case of prosecution. Hence, the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused, the Special Public Prosecutor has given up the evidence of remaining witnesses i.e. Lw4/G.Priscilla,

LW5/Naseem Fathima, LW6/H.Balakrishna, LW7/Chella Yadagiri,

LW8/G.Srinivasulu,LW9/K.Achary,LW10/Dr.Nilofer,

LW11/Dr.Sainath, LW12/G.Swarna Rani, LW13/K.Asha Rani, Judicial

Magistrate of First Class, LW14/S.Jayaprasad in this case. Hence

the benefit of doubt should go to the accused. Therefore this Court of the opinion that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused for the offences alleged against him under Sections 366, 376 (2) (n) of IPC, section 5 (l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.

15 Spl. S.C No.215 of 2021

16. In the result, Accused is found not guilty for the offences under sections 366, 376 (2) (n) of IPC, section 5 (l) r/w 6 of POCSO

Act 2012 and accordingly, accused is acquitted under section 235 (1)

Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall stand cancelled after expiry of appeal time as per section 437-A of Cr.P.C. The M.O.1 (Honour android mobile phone) confiscated to the state after expiry of appeal time. The valuable unmarked case propety, if any, shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer Grade-III, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court, on this the 29th day of November, 2024.

Sd/-

Judge, Family Court-cum- III Addl District

and Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar, FAC, the Fast Track Special Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Mahabubnagar .

A ppendix of Evidence

(Witnesses examined)

On behalf of Prosecution:

Pw.1Father of victim (Identity not disclosed)

Pw.2 Victim girl (Identity not disclosed)

Pw.3 Victim girl (Identity not disclosed)

Pw.4 G.Veeraswamy, Investigating Officer 16 Spl. S.C No.215 of 2021

On behalf of Defence:

- Nil -

Exhibits marked

On behalf of Prosecution:

Ex.P1 Signature of PW1 on complaint

Ex.P2 161 Cr.P.C statement of Pw.1

Ex.P3 161 Cr.P.C statement of Pw.1

Ex.P4 161 Cr.P.C statement of Pw.2

Ex.P5 161 Cr.P.C statement of Pw.3

Ex.P6 Complaint

Ex.P7 First Information Report

Ex.P8 1st Crime Detail Form

Ex.P9 Section alteration memo

Ex.P10 preliminary report

Ex.P11 Forensic Lab report

Ex.P12 Final opinion report

Ex.P13 Bonafide certificate of PW2

Ex.P14 Confession cum seizure panchanama

Ex.P15 2nd Crime Detail Form

Ex.P16 Potency report.

On behalf of Defence:

- Nil -

Material Objects marked

M.O.1 Is the Honour android mobile phone.

Sd/-

Judge, Family Court-cum- III Addl District

and Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar, FAC, the Fast Track Special Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Mahabubnagar.