Ghaziabad: Court acquits man arrested for minor girl’s rape

To remain silent for over two years, delay in lodging FIR, absence of clear dates or times, and the refusal of medical examination — all contribute to a weakened prosecution case, the court observed

A special POCSO court in Ghaziabad has acquitted a 40-year-old man accused of sexually assaulting a minor girl, citing inconsistencies in the prosecution’s case and lack of reliable evidence. The man was ordered to be released immediately from jail, unless required in any other case.

During the trial, the court pointed to the nine-day delay in filing the complaint after the girl allegedly disclosed the incidents to her family, and the lack of specific dates or timelines provided by the victim, despite her being educated. (Sakib Ali/HT Photo)

The first information report (FIR) was registered in October 2023 by the girl’s elder sister at Sahibabad police station under sections of the Indian Penal Code relating to rape, along with relevant provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The girl was 13 years and 10 months old at the time of the complaint.

The FIR alleged that the accused, who was known to the family for several years, had sexually assaulted the girl over a period of two-and-a-half years. However, the court, in its April 11 order, noted several gaps in the prosecution’s narrative.

During the trial, the court pointed to the nine-day delay in filing the complaint after the girl allegedly disclosed the incidents to her family, and the lack of specific dates or timelines provided by the victim, despite her being educated. The girl also declined to undergo medical examination, which the court observed further weakened the case. In her testimony, the victim stated that her sister had advised her against the examination.

The judgment, delivered by special judge (POCSO Act) Bharat Singh Yadav, also cited jail records showing that the victim’s mother visited the accused 29 times during his incarceration. The court said this raised questions about the nature of the relationship and supported the defence claim that the accused had been falsely implicated due to personal enmity.

“To remain silent for over two years, the delay in lodging the FIR, the absence of clear dates or times, and the refusal of medical examination — all contribute to a weakened prosecution case,” the court observed.

Referring to a 2012 Supreme Court ruling, the judge held that the quality of the victim’s evidence did not meet the threshold required for conviction in such cases. The court found the case lacked sufficient evidence to support a conviction, noting inconsistencies and gaps in testimony.