Prosecution 'utterly fails' to prove grandfather raped 5-year-old

NT Correspondent

Bengaluru: Noting that the prosecution has “utterly failed” to prove its case, the High Court of Karnataka let go of a 51-year-old who was accused of raping his five-year-old granddaughter.

Blaming the prosecution, the HC said, “The prosecution has not shown its proficiency or expertise in the examination of the witnesses in this case. The consequence is that none of the witnesses have spoken about the accused committing the alleged incident.”

The Hunsur town police had challenged the acquittal of the accused by the Special Judge in Mysuru in April 2016 in a case from 2015 in an appeal before the High Court.

The HC bench of Justice HB Prabhakara Sastry and Justice Anil B Katti gave their judgement on it recently. The accused was charged by the police under Section 376 (rape) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

However, finding that there is sufficient material to frame the charge against the accused, the Special Court framed the charges about the offences punishable under Section 376(2)(f)(i) of IPC and under Section 5(i)(m) & (n) r/w Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

However, the failure of the prosecution led to his acquittal. In the HC, the accused was represented by an Amicus curiae.

The victim girl and her mother, who filed the complaint, were the main witnesses in the case. Among other things the HC noted that in the trial, the prosecution had failed to conduct a cross-examination of the witnesses about the injuries sustained by the victim.

“The prosecution should have re-examined the witness and ascertained that the witness was admitting the suggestion with respect to the first two injuries suffered by her but not the alleged injury near to the private organ of the body. However, for the best reasons best known to it, the prosecution did not choose to re-examine.”

The HC also noted that “the expert opinion in the form of medical doctor has ruled out the possibility of sexual act or sexual intercourse upon the victim girl.”

The police did not even ascertain the alleged place of crime in their investigation.

“However, for the reasons best known to them, they did not undertake such an act of investigation,” the HC noted.

Because of the failure of the prosecution, the HC found the accused not guilty. It dismissed the appeal and upheld the Special Court order stating, “Since it is noticing the same the Special Court had acquitted the accused of the alleged guilt, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment.”

It also ordered the release of the accused. The accused, “who is presently in judicial custody is ordered to be released immediately, provided he is not required to be detained in custody in any other case,” the judgement said. (CrlA 1539/2016)