Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, May 30: Principal Sessions Judge, M K Hanjura today discharged at the stage of framing charge one Ravinder, son of Parshotam, who was accused of kidnapping and rape.
According to the police case, on April 20, 2013, Ram Dass, son of Kashi Ram of W.No 17, Mashatalab Kathua lodged a written complaint mentioning that his daughter had gone to answer the call of nature but did not return. She had been enticed away by the accused namely Ravinder Kumar, the son of his brother’s sister-in-law.
During the investigation of the case, Judicial Magistrate Kathua recorded the statements of prosecutrix and her father Ram Dass under Section 164-A CrPC. On the completion of the investigation of the case the complicity of the accused with the commission of the offences under Section 376/363RPC was made out. A chargesheet for these offences was accordingly laid by the police authorities against the accused before the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kathua.
After hearing Public Prosecutor Ravi Gupta for the State whereas Advocate Pardeep Singh for the accused, Principal Sessions Judge observed, “statements of two witnesses are germane to the issues raised in the case. They have given a vivid image of the occurrence of the event. From their statements the complicity of the accused is not even remotely made out. On the statements of these witnesses what can reasonably be concluded is that prosecutrix went to the place of the dwelling of the accused on her own in the wee hours of the morning of April 16, 2012. Not only this prosecutrix has been emphatic in stating that the accused had not kidnapped or abducted her”.
“The father of prosecutrix has asserted that he suspected the involvement of the accused in abducting prosecutrix. He reported the occurrence to the police authorities. However, his daughter told him that she had been to the house of the accused on her own.
There has been a complete volte face by the complainant. He has denied any such occurrence having taken place at all. Prosecutrix has simply smashed the prosecution case in its entirety. There is not even a grain of evidence in her statement to state that the accused seduced her sexually”, the Court said, adding “the accused cannot be said to have committed any offence when there is no legally acceptable evidence to state so”.
With these observations, Court discharged the accused of the offences under Section 363/376 RPC and ordered his release from custody.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel