Uttarakhand High Court grants bail to man convicted 'without evidence' in POCSO case

Nainital: The Uttarakhand High Court has expressed strong displeasure over the decision of a lower court to convict an accused in a POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences) case without evidence and ordered his release on bail.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice G Narender and Justice Alok Mahara, while hearing an appeal by the accused, Rampal, said it was not a case of insufficient evidence but an absence of evidence.

Rampal, a resident of Jakhole village in Uttarkashi district, was arrested in January 2022 for allegedly luring and sexually assaulting a minor girl.

On January 18, 2024, the special sessions judge in Uttarkashi convicted him under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and relevant sections of the POCSO Act, and sentenced him to 20 years' imprisonment with a fine.

The high court, while hearing Rampal's appeal on October 17, said the police and the prosecution had failed to even ascertain where the alleged crime took place.

The court said the victim was found with the accused near Arakot Bazar bridge on January 23, 2022, but no evidence was produced of any place -- a house, building or hotel -- where the crime allegedly took place. Nor were there any eyewitness testimonies, it said.

The medical report stated that there were no injuries, swelling or wounds on the body or genitals of the victim, and the doctor who conducted her medical examination did not record any marks of forced sexual intercourse in his report, the bench observed.

Stating that the lower court's order was surprising, the bench observed that it relied on a document that was not even part of the record.

The victim did not repeat allegations against the accused in the court, but despite this, the lower court found him guilty, it said.

The bench observed that the lower court relied on the victim's statement recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code even though it was never exhibited or included in the record.

Moreover, in her own testimony, the victim had clearly denied having any physical relationship with the accused, it said.