Victim not expected to run to police station immediately: HC

S Shyam Prasad | NT

Bengaluru: Stating that a sexual assault victim is not expected to run to the police station immediately after the incident, the High Court set aside the acquittal of a 29-year-old accused and sentenced him to seven years imprisonment under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offence (POCSO) Act.

“The Hon'ble Apex Court, after referring to several of its previous judgments reiterated that, in rape cases, the family of a victim girl is not expected to run immediately after the incident to the Police Station to lodge an FIR. It is quite but natural for the family members to discuss and decide as to whether the complaint is required to be lodged or not, taking into consideration the reputation of the family,” Justice HB Prabhakara Sastry and Justice Anil B Katti said in their judgement overturning the trial court order which had cited the delay in filing the complaint as one of the reasons for the acquittal of the accused.

The prosecution had filed the appeal in 2017 challenging the acquittal of the accused from Soraba taluk by the I Additional Sessions Judge in Shivamogga.

The accused had on May 18, 2013, dragged the 15-yearold victim who was washing utensils in the backyard of her house inside. He then gagged her mouth and at knife point sexually assaulted her. The girl’s struggles alerted a woman next door who came questioning.

The accused escaped, opened the door and on some pretext left the place. The victim’s parents came home later in the evening. Fearing the respect of the family and the girl’s fate they decided not to file a police complaint.

However, they had a change of mind and filed the complaint on June 22, 2013. The police investigated the matter and filed a charge sheet against the accused under Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and under Sections 4, 9 and 10 of the POCSO Act.

In October 2016, the trial court acquitted the accused. This was challenged in the HC by the prosecution. The HC said the Trial Court had erred in acquitting the accused.

“The medical evidence placed by the prosecution had fully corroborated the case of the prosecution. However, the Sessions Judge's Court by itself raising some untenable doubts disbelieved the case of the prosecution resulting in acquittal of the accused, as such, the same warrants interference at the hands of this Court,” it said.

Stating that the delay in the complaint does not affect the case, the HC said, “In the instant case (witnesses) have explained the reason for the delay which cannot be held as uncommon or unnatural. On the other hand, the delay having been convincingly explained by the said witness, the same is not fatal to the case of the prosecution. As such, the argument of the learned counsel for the respondent/accused on the said point is not acceptable.”

Holding the accused guilty, the HC sentenced him to seven years imprisonment under Section 4 of the POCSO Act, two years imprisonment under Section 506 and five years under Section 9(h) of the POCSO Act. “All the sentences shall run concurrently,” the HC said.

(CrlA 503/2017)