1 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022
IN THE COURT OF THE FAST TRACK SPECIAL JUDGE FOR
EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL AND DISPOSAL OF RAPE AND POCSO ACT
CASES, PEDDAPALLI.
PRESENT: SMT. SUNEETHA KUNCHALA,
Prl. Sessions Judge, Peddapalli FAC: Fast Track Spl Judge for Expeditious Trial & Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act Cases, Peddapalli.
THURSDAY, THE 4 th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025.
SC (POCSO) No. 19 of 2022
Name of the The State through Asst. Commissioner of complainantPolice, Peddapalli (Cr. No. 79 of 2022 of PS Pothkapalli).
Name of the accusedShilarapu Ramesh, s/o Rajaiah, 38yrs, Golla, R/o Upparapalli village
CHARGESUnder section 376AB, 376(2)(f), 342 of IPC and Sec. 5(m) r/w 6 of POCSO Act- 2012.
Plea of the accusedNot Guilty
Finding of the Court Guilty
Sentence or Order In result, Accused is found guilty for the offences punishable under section 376- AB, 376(2)(f), 342 of IPC and Sec. 5(m) r/w 6 of POCSO Act-2012, accordingly, he is convicted U/s. 235(2) of Cr.P.C.
In view of Section 42 of POCSO Act, as the victim girl was aged about (09) years at the time of offence, the accused is sentenced to suffer IMPRISONMENT FOR LIFE, which shall means imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand 2 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022 only) and in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence U/s. 5(m) r/w 6 of POCSO Act. Out of the fine amount, an amount of Rs.18,000/- (Rupees Eighteen thousand only) shall be paid to the victim girl as compensation.
The accused further sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of ONE ( 01 ) YEAR and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) and in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of fifteen (15) days for the offence U/s. 342 of IPC.
The above sentences shall run concurrently.
Total fine amount is of Rs.21,000/- (Rupees Twenty one thousand only).
The remand period, if any, undergone by the accused shall be set off U/s. 428 Cr.P.C.
The case property M.Os. 1 to 6 shall be destroyed after appeal time is over and the M.O.7/Motorcycle bearing No. TS- 22-D-7565, which was given to the accused for interim custody as per the orders in Cr.M.P.No. 180/2022, dated 25.11.2022 shall be confiscated to state after appeal time is over.
The accused is appraised about his right to prefer an appeal before the
Hon'ble High Court and he is further
informed that he will be provided legal- aid counsel, if required. Free copy of Judgment is supplied to him.
3 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022
As the accused is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 for committing sexual assault on the victim girl, this court is of considered opinion that the victim girl has to be compensated for her sufferance both physical and mental due to the commission of said offence on her, and as such, an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five lakhs only) is decided ascompensationamount. Therefore, the Secretary, DLSA is hereby directed to take steps to pay the said compensation amount to the victim girl at the earliest.
Prosecution conducted Sri B. Ramesh, Addl. Public Prosecutor by
Accused defended bySri K.Sanjeeva Reddy, Counsel for the accused.
This case is coming before this court on 28.08.2025 for hearing in the presence of Sri B. Ramesh, Addl.Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri K.Sanjeeva Reddy, Counsel for the Accused, having been heard, having perused the record and having stood over for consideration to this day the Court delivered the following:
:: J U D G M E N T ::
1.The State represented through the Asst. Commissioner of
Police, Peddapalli filed final report against the Accused for the offences punishable under section 376-AB (Criminal Law
Amendment Act, 2018), 376(2)(f), 342 of IPC and Sec. 5(m) r/w 6 of
POCSO Act-2012 in Cr. No. 79/2022 of PS Pothkapalli.
2.The brief facts of the prosecution case in nutshell is as follows:
4 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022 2(a). That on 02.06.2022 at 1300 hours, the defacto complainant/
Lw.1 lodged a complaint before the police stating that in view of summer holidays, his grand daughter i.e., victim came to their house. On 2.6.2022 at 0700 hours, as usual he along with his wife went for coolie work by leaving their grand daughter at the residence of his neighbour by name Shilarapu Ramesh i.e., accused as she has playing daily with his sons. After completion of his work at about 12.00 p.m., he came back to home and found the gathering of neighbours at his residence and also found the bleeding from the private parts of victim and crying. On enquiry, victim stated that the accused took her into his house on the pretext of providing food and while she was watching TV, his sons went out for playing, then, the accused closed the doors of house, removed her clothes and also removed his clothes and forcibly exploited her sexually by penetrating his penis into her vagina and when she started crying with pain, he closed her mouth and on observing the bleeding from her private parts, he left her.
Therefore, requested to take necessary action against the accused.
2(b). On the strength of the above said complaint, Pw.17 registered a case in Cr.No. 79/2022, U/sec. 376AB (Criminal Law Amendment
Act, 2018), 376(2)(f), 342 of IPC and Sec. 6 of POCSO Act and issued 5 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022
FIR. On the instructions of Pw.18, referred the victim girl to hospital for conducting medical examination and treatment, wherein Pw.15 examined the victim and preserved the material objects for onward transmission to RFSL, Karimnagar for analysis and report.
2(c). On receipt of FIR, Pw.18 took up the investigation and during his investigation, on his instructions Pw.10 visited Govt. Hospital,
Peddapalli and examined and recorded the statement of victim and the same was videographed by Lw.17/Kavya Sri, WPC, then secured the presence of Lw.23/G.Bhavya and Pw.13, seized the blood stained clothes of victim girl at Govt. Hospital, Peddapalli and also photographed the same with her mobile. On the same day, Pw.18 visited the scene of offence i.e., residence of accused, drafted rough sketch of scene in the presence of Lw.21 & 22 (R.Kumaraswamy &
K.Ravinder) photographed the scene and incorporated the detains into crime detains form and observed the blood marks on the floor in the scene of offence, preserved the same by collecting with a gauge cloth and also seized the blood stained Lungi of accused in the presence of same mediators and also secured the presence of complainant, Pws.2 to 4, Lw.4/father of victim, Lw.7 to 9 (P.Yashoda,
B.Rajamma & K.Radhamma). Thereafter, collected the date of birth 6 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022 certificate of victim from Pw.9 and as per it, the ate of birth of victim is 29.10.2013.
2(d). While the efforts are in progress, on reliable information on the same day i.e., on 2.6.2022 at 1745 hours, Pw.17 apprehended the accused at Peddakalvala village and on interrogation in the presence of Lw.25/N.Ramesh and Pw.14, accused voluntarily confessed the commission of offence and on observation, found his underwear with blood stains, then seized the same by removing from him in the presence of said mediators and recorded the confession and seizure report and also seized the Hero Passion Pro motorcycle bearing No. TS-22-D-7565 from the possession of accused duly pasting signed chits of mediators, then, brought him to police station, effected his arrest and referred to Govt. Hospital,
Peddapalli for examination and potency test, accordingly, Pw.16 conducted potency test and issued report by stating that “there is nothing to suggest that he can not perform sexual act”, later produced the accused before the court for judicial remand.
2(e). During the course of further investigation, Pw.18 again visited the scene of offence at Upparapalli village, secured the presence of
Pw.5 to 7, Lw.12/K.Sarojana, Lw.14/Padma, examined and recorded their statements, thereafter examined and recorded the statement 7 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022 of Pw.11 and Lw.20/Naresh. At the time of seizure of cloths of victim at Govt. Hospital, Pw.10 took photographs in her mobile phone and the same was converted into CD by Lw.20 and the same was certified by him U/s. 65-B of Indian Evidence Act. Thereafter, got recorded the statements of victim and Pw.6 U/s. 164 Cr.P.C.
through Lw.29/learned JMFC., Peddapalli and collected the medical examination report from Pw.15, wherein the medical officer stated that on receipt of RFSL report, she has issued final opinion by stating that “there is c/o bleeding followed by perineal injury”. After completion of investigation and after collecting all the relevant records, filed charge sheet against the accused for the aforesaid offences.
3. The case was taken on file for the offences U/Sec. 376AB (Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2018), 342, 376(2)(f) of IPC and Sec.
5(m) r/w 6 of POCSO Act against the sole accused by the Prl.
District and Sessions Judge, Peddapalli. On appearance of the accused, copies of the case records relied upon by the prosecution were furnished to him as contemplated U/Sec. 207 of Cr.P.C.
4.In view of establishment of Fast Track Special Judge for expeditious disposal of Rape and POCSO Act cases at Peddapalli, 8 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022 this case was transferred to this court as per the Orders Dis.
No.753, dated: 06.08.2022 for disposal according to law.
5. On appearance of the accused, he was examined under section 228 of Cr.P.C. and charges under section U/Sec. 376 AB (Criminal
Law Amendment Act, 2018), 342, 376(2)(f) of IPC and Sec. 5(m) r/w 6 of POCSO Act have been framed against the Accused, read over and explained the contents to him in Telugu, for which, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
6.To prove its case, prosecution examined Pw.1 to Pw.18 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P25 and M.Os. 1 to 7.
7. After closure of prosecution evidence, the accused is examined
U/s. 313 of Cr.P.C., by explaining the incriminating evidence produced against him, for which, he denied the same and reported no defence.
8.Heard both sides and perused the entire record.
9.Now the points that arises for consideration are:
1. Whether the prosecution has established the guilt of the Accused for the offences punishable under Section U/Sec. 376AB (Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2018), 376(2)(f) of IPC, beyond all reasonable doubt?
2. Whether the prosecution has established the guilt of the Accused for the offences punishable U/Sec.342
of IPC, beyond all reasonable doubt?
9 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022
3. Whether the prosecution has established the guilt of the Accused for the offences punishable under Section 5(m) r/w 6 of POCSO Act, beyond all reasonable doubt?
POINTS 1 to 3:
10.The case of the prosecution is that the accused committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim girl/Pw.1 by wrongfully confining her in his house.
11.The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the victim girl consistently stated before the court that the accused committed penetrative sexual assault on her and her evidence is supported by the evidence of other prosecution witnesses and more particularly with the medical evidence which goes to show that the penetrative sexual assault committed on the victim girl and the entire evidence of prosecution witnesses clearly establishes that the accused committed the penetrative sexual assault on the victim girl and there are no contradictions in the evidence of prosecution witnesses and the entire evidence is pointing out at the accused that he committed the charged offences and prayed for conviction.
12.Per contra, the learned defence counsel argued that there are many contradictions in the evidence of prosecution witnesses wherein Pws. 1 and 2 stated that Lw.1 also came to the hospital, but 10 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022 as per the prosecution case, Lw.1 went to police station to lodge complaint at around 1200 noon and FIR was issued at 1.00 p.m., which shows that Lw.1 did not go to hospital and even the victim girl did not state anything about the wife of the accused as to whether she was present in the house at the time of the commission of offence and even the time of commission of offence was stated differently by the prosecution witnesses and even the specific place in Govt. Hospital, where the clothes of victim girl are seized was also not mentioned and the boundaries of scene of offence are also not tallying and there was no signature of panch witnesses on the panch chits and Pw.18 did not collect any document to show that Lw.1 and Pw.5 attended Upadhi Hami pathakam work on the date of offence and more over all the prosecution witnesses are relatives and known persons to the victim girl and as such they are supported the version of the victim girl and there is no substantiate evidence to show that the accused committed the alleged offence and the accused never committed any offence as alleged and a false case was foisted against him in view of the dispute between their families and the accused is entitled for acquittal and prayed for the same.
11 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022
13.On hearing the rival contentions of both parties, the first
and foremost point to be considered is that whether the victim
girl was minor as on the date of offence; 13(a). The evidence of Pw.9, who is Head Master, MPPS, Godishala coupled with Ex.P2/Study, conduct and date of Birth certificate of
Pw.1/victim girl goes to show that the date of birth of victim girl is 29.10.2013. The date of offence was 02.06.2022. As such, the victim girl was aged around Nine (09) years and was a Minor as on the date of offence. The learned counsel for the accused argued that there is no sufficient evidence to show that the victim girl was minor as on the date of alleged offence and Ex.P2 can not be taken into consideration. As the victim is now studying 7th class, the date of birth certificate issued by the school can be taken into consideration to fix the date of birth of the victim girl. Therefore, where the issuing authority of Ex.P2 was examined and after verification of records, the date of birth of the victim girl was issued by Pw.9, this court has no hesitation to believe that the date of birth of the victim girl is 29.10.2013 and she was minor as on the date of commission of offence. Accordingly, this point is answered.
14.The second important point to be considered is whether
any penetrative sexual assault was committed on the victim
girl; 12 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022 14(a). In this regard, it is pertinent to look into the medical evidence. The evidence of Medical officer, who is examined as
Pw.15/Dr. Rukmini coupled with Ex.P14 to P18 is crucial, wherein her evidence goes to show that on 02.06.2022 on receipt of requisition from SI of Police, Pothkapalli, she conducted medical examination of the victim girl/Pw.1, aged 9 years and found the victim girl bleeding with a perineal tear + 2nd degree and her hymen was found ruptured and the victim girl was conscious and coherent but she was unable to walk and the victim girl was sutured to stop her bleeding and few medicines were prescribed and accordingly, she issued the Preliminary medical examination report/Ex.P14. She further deposed that she collected the vaginal swabs, smear and nail clippings of the victim girl for forwarding the same to FSL and after receipt of the FSL report Ex.P17, she issued her final opinion/
Ex.P18 opining that “there is evidence of bleeding followed by perineal injury”. In her cross examination, she clearly stated that it is very unlikely that the injury sustained by the victim girl might be caused by any sharp object or sticks of the trees. This statement of
Pw.15 clearly rules out the contention of the learned defence counsel that the victim girl sustained the injury with sticks while playing under the trees and bushes. The evidence of Pw.15 clearly 13 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022 establishes that a penetrative sexual assault was committed on the victim girl, who was aged Nine (09) years.
15.Where the evidence of Pw.9 and Pw.15 coupled with
Ex.P2 and Ex.P14 to P18 clearly establishes that penetrative
sexual assault was committed on the victim girl, who was
minor as on the date of offence, now the point to be
considered is whether the accused committed the penetrative
sexual assault on the victim girl as alleged by the prosecution .
15(a).In this case, the crucial witness is the victim girl, who is examined as Pw.1. The evidence of Pw.1/victim girl goes to show that after completing her 3rd class in the year 2022, she came to her grand mother’s house at Upparpalli village of Odela Mandal for summer holidays and stayed with her grand parents and after one month, on one day in the morning hours after having food, she went to the house of Thirumala and by that time they were going to village and on that she went to the house of her senior paternal mother by name Bairi Rayamma, from there, she went to the house of Sravya Akka, there the rituals of her grand mother were going, as such she came back to her grand mother’s house and sat underneath the Neem tree which was in front of the house and thereafter, she went to the tin shed of one Bhagya and at that time accused called her to his house and on that she went to the house 14 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022 of accused and at that time his two sons were having food and she started watching TV and after having food, the two sons of the accused went out of the house for playing, at that time, accused called her to him and she went to him and the accused caught hold her hand and dragged her into the house and bolted the door and on that she asked him as to why he closed the door and he said that he will sleep and he asked her to watch TV and on that she said that she will go, but the accused stopped her and pushed her on the cot, removed his underwear and also removed her pant and underwear and put his toilet part on her toilet part and there was bleeding at her toilet place and the accused asked her to wipe out the blood and she wiped it with her left hand and then she was going out by wearing slippers and at that time, accused called her again to come to him but she did not came back and went to her grand mother’s house and went to bathroom, washed her private part and wore her underwear and sat under the tin shed in front of the house and after some time she opened the lock of the kitchen, had water, switched on the fan and was sitting and crying and at that time, Manisha/
Lw.13 came to her and asked her why she was crying and on that she informed the matter to Manisha and on that due to fear,
Manisha informed the matter to Shravya Akka and Sravani Akka/ 15 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022
Lw.11 and they informed the matter to Yashoda Ammamma/ Lw.7 came to her and by that time her grand mother/Lw.10 also came home from work and she informed the matter to her and Lw.1,Lw.6 and Lw.10 took her to Peddapalli Government Hospital. She also stated that her statement was recorded by police and also by a
Judge.
16.The victim girl was cross examined at length by the learned defence counsel and in her cross examination, she stated that there are plants and tree near to the house of her grand parents and the house of accused. She also stated that she did not stated before the police specifically that the incident happened after one month after her coming to the house of her grand parents and she also did not specifically stated that the accused bolted the door, pushed her on the cot. The contention of the learned defence counsel is that the victim girl did not specifically mention about said words in her statement is not at all a material contradiction as the victim girl clearly stated in her statement that “Ramesh Bava nannu cheyye pattukoni inti lopaliki theesukoni poi, enduku door peduthunnav vaddu annakuda vinakunda door petti nenu padukunta nuvvu TV chudu ani cheppindu”, which means nothing but the accused bolted 16 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022 the door. Nothing important was elicited form the cross examination of the victim girl to disbelieve her evidence.
17.The evidence of Pw.1 is supported by the evidence of Pw.7, who is another crucial witness in this case as she saw the victim girl with bleeding and coming from the house of accused. The evidence of Pw.7 goes to show that on 02.06.2022 at around 10.00 am while she was going to her new house from her old house, she noticed the victim girl/Pw.1 going from the house of accused towards her grand parents house by crying and she also noticed the victim girl was bleeding from her inners and due to fear, she went to the house of
Sravani/Pw.6 and informed the matter to her/Pw.6 and her mother and they all came back to the house of Pw.5 and on enquiry, the victim girl/ Pw.1 informed them that the accused took her into his house, closed the doors, removed his cloths and also removed the cloths of the victim girl and committed bad thing on her, due to which, she started bleeding and when she was crying, accused sent her out. Pw.7 further deposed that Pw.6 went to the house of
Yashoda/ Lw.7 informed the matter to her and Lw.7 came to the house of Pw.5 and by that time, people gathered there.
18.The evidence of Pw.1 and 7 is supported by the evidence of
Pw.6 and her evidence goes to show that on 02.06.2022 at around 17 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022 09.00am while they were preparing Appalu at their house the victim girl came to their house, stayed for some time and went away and after one hour i.e., around 10.00 am, Pw.7 came to their house and informed that she saw the Pw.1 going from the house of accused by crying, then, they went and asked her as to why she was crying and also noticed bleeding to the victim girl and on that Pw.6 along with her mother went to the house of Pw.5 and enquired with victim girl and she disclosed that the accused took her to his house, closed the door, removed his dress and committed rape on her and when she had bleeding at her private parts, accused sent her from his house and then Pw.6 informed the matter to Lw.7/Yashoda.
19.The evidence of Pw.1,6 and 7 is further supported by the evidence of Pw.3, whose evidence goes to show that around three years ago on one day at around 10.00 am he went to the house of
Lw.1/Rayamallu as he noticed the presence of Pw.4, Lw.7/Yashoda,
Pw.6 & 7 at the house of Lw.1 and he saw the victim girl was crying and at that time, Lw.1 and Pw.5 were not present at the house and on that they all enquired with the victim girl as to what happened and she disclosed that while she was playing with the sons of accused, the accused called her to his house to have food and when she went into his house, accused closed the doors, removed his 18 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022 clothes and also the cloths of the victim girl and committed rape on her and when she cried, he closed her mouth and she also sustained bleeding from her private parts and on that the accused opened the door and asked her to go away and when she asked her to wash her private parts at his house, the accused asked her to go home and wash and on that she came to her house and washed her private parts. The evidence of Pw.3 further goes to show that on seeing the gathering at the house of the victim girl, the accused fled away from there on his motor cycle and on that they informed the matter to Pw.8/Sarpanch over phone, and Pw.8 gave him the phone number of SI of Police and asked him to inform the matter to police and on that, he informed the matter to SI of police Pothkapalli over phone and in the mean time, Lw.1 and Pw.5 came to home and they asked Lw.1 to go to police station and lodge the complaint and he along with his wife Pw.13/Kavitha, Pw.4&5, Lw.7 to 9 took the victim girl to Government Hospital, Peddapalli by changing her blood stained clothes and kept the same in a cover and took them along with them to the hospital. In his cross examination, he stated that the accused used to run chicken center at Peddakalvala village earlier and now he was not running the same.
19 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022
20.The evidence of Pw.1,3, 6 and 7 is further supported by the evidence of Pw. 4, whose evidence goes to show that around three years ago on one day at around 10.00 am, he and his wife/
Lw.7/Yashoda were having food in their house, Pw.6 came to their house and informed them that the victim girl was crying at her grand parents house and she was bleeding and on that they both rushed to the house of Lw.1, enquired with the victim girl and she disclosed that while the sons of accused were playing, the accused called her into his house to have food, closed the door and removed her clothes and committed offence on her and when she cried, he closed her mouth and when she tried to wash at his house, he asked her to go home and wash and on that she came to home and washed the bleeding. He further deposed that they noticed the victim girl was bleeding and her clothes were with blood stains and on seeing them, the accused fled away from there and thereafter, they shifted the victim girl to Government Hospital, Peddapalli.
21.In his cross examination, he stated that there is only one
Neem tree in front of house of accused and the accused was not running any chicken center. He also clearly stated that Lw.1 and pw.5 were not present in the house at that time and they came home at around 10.30 a.m.
20 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022
22.The evidence of Pw.1,3,4, 6 and 7 is further supported by the evidence of Pw.8, who worked as Sarpanch at the relevant point of time and his evidence goes to show that while he was in the neighbouring village, Pw.3 called him over phone and informed that the accused committed rape on the victim girl and she was bleeding and on that he asked Pw.3 to call SI of police and gave his phone number to Pw.3 and he called SI of police over phone and informed the matter to him and by the time he came to village, the victim girl was taken to hospital and when he went to the house of accused, he noticed the blood stains near the cot in the house of accused and he also went to the house of victim girl and there also he noticed the blood stains near the steps and at about 4.00 p.m., police came to the house of accused and he was present there at that time. In the cross examination, after 10 to 15 minutes after receiving phone call from Pw.3, he called the SI of police and informed the matter.
Nothing important was elicited from his cross examination to disbelieve his evidence.
23.The evidence of Pw.1,3,4 6 and 7 is further supported by the evidence of Pw. 5, who is the grand mother of victim girl. Her evidence goes to show that about three years ago, victim girl/Pw.1 came to their house at Upparpalli for summer holidays and on one 21 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022 day, she (Pw.5) and her husband/Lw.1 went to attend their work and at that time victim girl was alone in their house and they returned home after completion of their work before afternoon and noticed
Pw.1 was crying and by that time, Pws. 3, 4, Yashoda/Lw.7 and Pw.6 were present with the victim girl and on enquiry, the victim girl disclosed that the accused called her into his house to have food and when she went to his house and he closed the doors, laid her on the cot, removed his cloths and also removed the underwear of the victim girl, put his washroom part into the private part of the
Pw.1 and the victim girl was started bleeding from her private part, on that accused asked her to go out and wash it. She further deposed that she noticed the bleeding and is unable to walk and on that they changed the clothes of victim girl, packed them in a cover and took the victim girl to Government Hospital, Peddapalli.
24.The evidence of Pw.1/victim girl is further supported by the evidence of Pw.2, who is mother of victim girl and her evidence goes to show that the victim girl used to go to the house of her parents at Upparpalli for every summer holidays and in the year 2022 also Pw.1 went to her parents house at Upparpalli for summer holidays and on 02.06.2022, one of their relative from Upparpalli called her over phone and informed that the victim girl/Pw.1 is not 22 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022 doing well and she was being taken to Government Hospital,
Peddapalli and on that she and her husband/ Lw.4 rushed to
Peddpalli Hospital and enquired with Pw.5 and the victim girl and they informed them that accused called the victim girl and she went to his house to paly with his sons and then, accused closed the door, removed the cloths of Pw.1 and kept his private part into her private part till her bleeding by closing her mouth and also beat her and when Pw.1 cried, he asked her to go home and wash.
25.Pws. 1 to 6 were cross examined at length by the learned defence counsel, but nothing important was elicited from their cross examination to disbelieve their evidence.
26.The evidence of Pws. 1 to 7 is supported by the evidence of
Pw.13, who is wife of Pw.3 and panch witness for the seizure panchanama of clothes of victim girl. Her evidence goes to show that on 02.06.2022 at around 04.00 pm, they took the victim girl to
Government Hospital, Peddapalli and Pw.3 carried the blood stained cloths of the victim girl to the Hospital and there police conducted seizure panchanama of the clothes of the victim girl in her presence and in the presence of Lw.23/Bhagya and the clothes (M.Os 1 to 3) were shown to the victim girl and the victim girl identified them as 23 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022 her clothes and thereafter, she signed on the seizure panchanama of clothes/Ex.P3.
27.The evidence of the victim girl is further supported by the evidence of Pw.12, who is panch witness for scene observation panchanama and his evidence goes to show that on 02.06.2022 at around 4.00 pm, he along with Lw.21/Kumaraswamy went to the
Scene of offence on coming to know about the incident and after some time, police came to the scene of offence and asked him and
Lw.21 to act as panch witnesses and they accepted and on that police conducted Scene observation Panchanama, prepared Ex.P10/
Crime details form and rough sketch map of the scene in their presence and police also collected the blood stains on the floor from the scene of offence with cotton (M.O.5) and stored them in a box and also collected a blood stained lungi (M.O.4) from Scene of offence in their presence and obtained their signatureson Ex.P10 and panch slips. Nothing important was elicited from his cross examination. The learned defence counsel argued that Pw.12 did not mention the correct boundaries to the scene of offence and as such his evidence can not be believed.
28.Coming to this contention, it is not the contention of the accused that the scene of offence is not his house. As such, this 24 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022 court has no hesitation to rely upon the evidence of Pw.12 with regard to the Crime details form and seizure at the scene of offence.
29.The evidence of Pw.12 is supported by the evidence of Pw.11, who obtained the photographs of the scene of offence. The evidence of Pw.11 goes to show that on 2.6.2022 at request of police, Pothkapalli, he went to the house of Shiarapu Ramesh/ accused at Upparapalli village, and obtained photographs of the scene of offence i.e., blood stains in the room, one cot and bed and police at the scene of offence under Ex.P7 and Ex.P8.
30.Further the evidence of Pw.14, who is panch witness for confession and recovery panchanama is also supporting the evidence of Pws. 1 to 7 and Pw.12, wherein his evidence goes to show that the accused confessed the guilt of commission of offence in his presence and in pursuant to his confession, police seized one motor cycle bearing No. TS-22-D-7565 (M.O.7) and also the underwear of the accused (M.O.6) which he wore at the time of commission of offence under the cover of Ex.P11-confession cum seizure panchanama.
31.The evidence of Pw.10, who recorded the statement of victim goes to show that on the instructions of investigation officer she 25 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022 rushed to the Government Hospital, Peddapalli along with Lw.17/
J.Kavya, WPC and by the time they reached the hospital, Pw.1 was undergoing first aid and after first aid, she examined and recorded the statement of the victim girl under the videography in her mobile with the help of Lw.17 and the same was converted into
Ex.P3/DVD, thereafter, she seized the clothes of the victim girl in the presence of panch witnesses under the cover of seizure panchanama, M.O.1 is the green colour top. M.O.2 is the legging and M.O.3 is the underwear and prepared the seizure report under
Ex.P4 and she also got obtained the photographs of M.O’s 1 to 3 and took printouts of the photographs from her mobile, Ex.P5 is the five (5) positive photographs of the cloths of the victim girl and obtained Sec. 65-B Certificate from Lw.20/photographer.Ex.P6 is
Sec.65-B Certificate, thereafter, handed over the statement of the victim girl, Ex.P3 to Ex.P6 and M.O’s 1 to 3 to Pw.18 to the investigation officer.
32.Further, the evidence of Pw.16/Dr.Ram Murthy coupled with
Ex.P19 Potency certificate clearly establishes that the accused is potent and there is nothing to suggest that he can not perform sexual act.
26 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022
33.Further, the evidence of Pws. 17 and 18, who are investigation officers is also supporting the version of all the prosecution witnesses, wherein Pw.17 and 18 re-iterated the contents of charge sheet with regard to the investigation done by them. Even though,
Pw.17 and 18 are examined in cross at length, nothing important was elicited from their cross examination to disbelieve the evidence of prosecution witnesses.
34.More over, the FSL report clearly shows that human blood is detected on Item Nos. 1,2,4,5,6,7,8 and 9 and the blood group of blood stains on item No.1,4,5,6,7,8 and 9 is of ‘O’ blood group. On perusing the Items No.1,4,6,7,8 and 9, they are cotton swabs, a green colour top, green colour pant with dark brown stains and maroon colour underwear with dark brown stains, which are clothes of victim girl and a blue and white coloured lungi and sky-blue colour underwear with dark brown stains, which are the clothes of accused. This FSL report clearly shows that the same blood group was found on the clothes of the victim girl and the accused, which clearly establishes that the accused committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim girl, due to which she suffered bleeding from her private parts and the same blood was found on the lungi and underwear of the accused. As the same blood was found on the 27 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022 clothes of both victim and the accused, it is clear that the penetrative sexual assault was committed by the accused on the victim girl.
35.Minor contradictions are bound to happen while conducting the investigation of a criminal case. The contradictions raised by the learned defence counsel are not material and significant contradictions and the said contradictions are not disturbing the root cause of the offence and as such the same need not be considered. The courts shoulder a great responsibility while taking an accused on charges of rape. They must deal with such case with utmost sensitivity. The courts should exercise the broader probabilities of a case and not got swayed by minor contradictions or insignificant discrepancies in the statement of the prosecutrix, which are not of a fatal nature, to throw out an otherwise reliable prosecution case.
36.More over, the statement of accused was neither disclosing anything towards false implication nor rebutting allegation.
Accused failed to rebut the presumption drawn against him.
Further there is no reason for the victim girl to depose false against the accused and to implicate him in this case.
28 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022
37. In view of the above discussion, it is to be seen that the victim girl/Pw.1 is consistent in her evidence corroborating with her statements U/s. 161 Cr.P.C and Sec. 164 of Cr.P.C. and she withstood the cross examination by the learned defence counsel and the chain of circumstances is linked up without any breakage and the evidence of Pw.1 clinchingly shows that the accused called her to his house to have food and when his sons went out of the house, he closed the door and committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim girl and Pw.7 saw the victim girl coming from the house of accused with bleeding from her inners and she informed the matter to Pw.6 and her mother and on that, Pw.6 and her mother came to the house of the victim girl and enquired with her and the victim girl disclosed that the accused removed his clothes and her clothes and committed penetrative sexual assault on her, due to which she started bleeding from her private parts.
Pw.3 and 4 also came to the house of the victim girl and the victim girl disclosed the matter to them and Pw.3 carried the clothes of the victim girl in a cover along with them while shifting the victim girl to
Govt. Hospital, Peddapalli and also Pw.3 informed the matter to
Pw.8 and Pw.8 and Pw.3 informed the matter over phone to the SI of
Police, Pothkapalli. Lw.1/defacto complainant/grand father of victim 29 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022 (died) lodged a complaint with police and the evidence of Pw.15/Dr.
Rukmini coupled with Ex.P13 to Ex.P18 establishes that penetrative sexual assault was committed on the victim girl and the evidence of
Pw.16/Dr. Ram Murthy, coupled with Ex.P19 goes to show that the accused is potent and the evidence of Pws.11 and 12 coupled with
Ex.P7 to Ex.P10 goes to show that the blood stains were found in the house of the accused and one blood stained lungi/M.O.4 was also seized from the house of the accused and the evidence of
Pw.14 coupled with Ex.P11 and M.Os. 6 and 7 goes to show that the blood stained underwear of the accused was seized in pursuant to his confession and Ex.P17/FSL report clearly goes to show that the blood group of the blood stains found on cloths of victim girl as well as the accused is O+ve, which shows that the accused committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim girl. Further the evidence of
Pw.15 also shows that she sutured the private parts of victim girl in order to stop the bleeding, which shows the nature and severity of the offence.
38. Therefore, in view of the above evidence of prosecution witnesses which is consistent and corroborative with each other, this court is of considered opinion that the entire evidence is point out at the accused that the accused committed the penetrative 30 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022 sexual assault on the victim girl who was (9) years old as on the date of commission of offence by confining her in his house and closed the doors of his house and the prosecution has successfully established the guilt of commission of offence by the accused beyond all reasonable doubts. Accordingly, point is answered.
39.In result, Accused is found guilty for the offences punishable under section 376-AB, 376(2)(f), 342 of IPC and Sec. 5(m) r/w 6 of
POCSO Act-2012, accordingly, he is convicted U/s. 235(2) of Cr.P.C.
Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer, transcribed by
her, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 4 th day of September, 2025.
Sd/-
Prl. Sessions Judge, Peddapalli. FAC: Special Judge for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Cases of Rape and Protection of Child against sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, Peddapalli.
QUESTIONED WITH REGARD TO QUANTUM OF SENTENCE:
40.When the court questioned the accused about the quantum of sentence as the offences against him is proved and established for the offence U/s. 376-AB, 376(2)(f), 342 of IPC and Sec. 5(m) r/w 6 of
POCSO Act-2012, for which, Accused stated that he has to take care of his ill-health wife and two tender aged sons and sought the court to take lenient view. After hearing the accused, this court is of the 31 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022 considered opinion that a lenient view cannot be taken against him as the offence committed by him against the minor girl is henious in nature.
41. Section 42 of The Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act, 2012 Alternate Punishment speaks as follows:
-When an act or omission constitutes an offence punishable under this Act and also under Sections 166-A, 354-A, 354-B, 354- C, 354-D, 370, 370-A, 375, 376, 376-A, 376AB, 376-B, 376-C, 376-D, 376DA, 376DB or Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), then, notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, the offender found guilty of such offence shall be liable to punishment under this Act or under the Indian Penal Code as provides for punishment which is greater in degree”.
42.By considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the accused is sentenced to suffer IMPRISONMENT FOR LIFE, which
shall means imprisonment for the remainder of his natural
life and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand only) and in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo Simple
Imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence U/s. 5(m) r/w 6 of POCSO Act. Out of the fine amount, an amount of
Rs.18,000/- (Rupees Eighteen thousand only) shall be given to the victim girl as compensation.
The accused further sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of ONE (01) YEAR and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- 32 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022 (Rupees One thousand only) and in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of fifteen (15) days for the offence U/s. 342 of IPC.
The above sentences shall run concurrently.
Total fine amount is of Rs.21,000/- (Rupees Twenty one thousand only).
The remand period, if any, undergone by the accused shall be set off U/s. 428 Cr.P.C.
The case property M.Os. 1 to 6 shall be destroyed after appeal time is over and the M.O.7/Motorcycle bearing No. TS-22-D-7565, which was given to the accused for interim custody as per the orders in Cr.M.P.No. 180/2022, dated 25.11.2022 shall be confiscated to state after appeal time is over.
The accused is appraised about his right to prefer an appeal
before the Hon'ble High Court and he is further informed that he will
be provided legal-aid counsel, if required. Free copy of Judgment is supplied to him.
As the accused is convicted for the offence punishable under
Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 for committing sexual assault on the victim girl, this court is of considered opinion that the victim girl has to be compensated for her sufferance both physical and mental due to the commission of 33 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022 said offence on her, and as such, an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five lakhs only) is decided as compensation amount.
Therefore, the Secretary, DLSA is hereby directed to take steps to pay the said compensation amount to the victim girl at the earliest.
Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer, corrected and
pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 4 th day of September,
2025.
Sd/-
Prl. Sessions Judge, Peddapalli. FAC: Special Judge for Expeditious Trial& Disposal of cases of Rape and Protection of Child against sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, Peddapalli.
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
FOR THE PROSECUTION: FOR THE DEFENCE:
Pw.1 Victim -None-
Pw.2 Renuka (Mother of victim)
Pw.3 B.Hamsaraju (Neighbour of Pw.5)
Pw.4 P.Thirupathi (Neighbour of Pw.5)
Pw.5 B.Odemma (Grand mother of victim)
Pw.6 K.Shravani (Neighbour of Pw.5)
Pw.7 O.Maneesha (Neighbour of Pw.5)
Pw.8 P.Odelu (Sarpanch of Upparapalli)
Pw.9 D.Paniya (Head Master, MPPS, Ellanthakunta)
Pw.10 K.Mounika (WSI)
Pw.11 O.Sathish (Photographer)
Pw.12 K.Ravinder (Panch witness for Crime details form) 34 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022
Pw.13 B.Kavitha (Panch witness for seizure report)
Pw.14 N.Ranadheer Kumar (Panch witness for confession & Seizure report) Pw.15 Dr.K.Rukmini (Lady Medical Officer)
Pw.16 Dr.P.Ram Murthy (Medical officer)
Pw.17 S.Laxman (investigation officer)
Pw.18 S.Sarangapani (investigation officer)
EXHIBITS MARKED
FOR THE PROSECUTION:
Ex.P1Requisition, dated 03.06.2022 Ex.P2Study, conduct and Date of Birth certificate of victim Ex.P3DVD recording of statement of victim girl Ex.P4Seizure report of M.Os. 1 to 3 Ex.P5Five (05) positive photos of cloths of victim/M.Os. 1 to 3 Ex.P6Certificate U/Sec.65-B Indian Evidence Act Ex.P7Four (04) positive photos of scene of offence Ex.P8DVD of Ex.P7 Ex.P9Certificate U/Sec.65-B Indian Evidence Act Ex.P10Crime details form along with rough sketch Ex.P11Admissible portion of confession cum seizure panchanama Ex.P12Three (03) positive photos of Motorcycle bearing No. TS-22- D-7565 Ex.P13Requisition, dated 02.06.2022 Ex.P14Medical Examination Report Ex.P15Discharge ticket Ex.P16Forwarding letter to FSL Ex.P17FSL Report, dated 18.06.2022 Ex.P18Final Opinion Ex.P19Potency Certificate of accused Ex.P20 Complaint 35 of 35 SC No.19 of 2022
Ex.P21 First Information Report Ex.P22CD of photographs of blood stained cloths of victim Ex.P23Forwarding letter to RFSL, Karimnagar Ex.P24Letter of Advise Ex.P25Receipt issued by RFSL, Karimnagar
FOR THE DEFENCE: - Nil-
MATERIAL OBJECTS
M.O.1Green colour top M.O.2legging M.O.3Underwear M.O.4Blood stained lungi M.O.5Blood stained cotton M.O.6Underwear of accused M.O.7Motorcycle bearing No. TS-22-D-7565
Sd/-
Prl. Sessions Judge, Peddapalli. FAC: Special Judge for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Cases of Rape and Protection of Child against sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, Peddapalli.