The High Court · 2025

Judgment

This Crimrnal Appeal is filed challenging the judgment dated 31.O1..2024 passed in S.C.PCS.No.14 of 202Cr by the I Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad 2 The brief facts of the case are that the case wa.s hled by the State against the appellant/ accused for the offences punishable under Section 354 of IPC and Sections 9(l) and (n) r/w Section 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2072 (for short 'POCSO Act,), for sexually assaulting his minor daughter. The prosecution relied on the evidence including the testimony of the victim and statements of the witnesses' i.e., the mother oi the victim/de facto complainant/P.W. 1, the investigating officer (p\ /7), and others. The r.ictim/P.W.2 testified that the appellant touched her inappropriately on multiple occasions, to wLrich, the specific stand of the appellant was that the allegations against him were fabricated due to matrimonial disputes between him and PW 1 , who allegedly influenced the statements of the 2 sKs,J Crl.A.No.1O3 of 2024 victim. Further, the inconsistencies in the case of the prosecution, including a delay in hiing the complaint and the lack of medical evidence, were highlighted. However, the trial Court observed that the testimony of the victim is credible, holding that the statement of the child in sexual offenses does not necessarily require corroboration, as such, the accused was convicted under Section 235{21 of Cr.P.C., and sentenced to two years of simple imprisonment with a fine of {1O,O00 under Section 354 IPC, and five years of simple imprisonment with a fine of <10,O0O under Section 9(l)(n) r/w Section 1O of POCSO Act. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently, and the victim was awarded { 1,0O,0O0 AS compensation. Aggrieved thereby, this Criminal Appeal is preferred

3. Heard Sri P. Subash, learned counsel for the appellant Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public and Sri i Prosecutor for the respondent - State

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned judgment is contrary to law, the weight of evidence, and the probabilities of the case and that it is improper, incorrect, and not based on acceptable evidence. He further J sKs,J Crl.A.No.103 of2024 submitted that the trial Court failed to consider that PW-1 and the accused had matrimonial disputes and that PW 1 suspected the accused of having an affair wlth one XXXXXXXX a family friend and that the evrdence would clearly show that PW-1 blackmailed the accused belbre filing the POCSO case, demanding property and {5 crores for settlement and when her demands were not met, she used PW-2 to falsely implicate the accused. He contended that PW- 1 even consulted advocate.s and senior officers before liling the case, believing that Section 498-A and other matrimonial laws were ineffective, while the POCSO Act would ensure the arrest and conviction of the appellant.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant further contended that the trial Court overlooked the delay in lodging the complaint, as PW-1 initially tried to settle the matter with property and money but filed the case only after failing in her attempts and that PW-1, PW-2, and their family continued to meet the accused, visited hotels, and even celebrated birthday of victim/PW-2 together just before filing the complaint on 13- 11-2019. He lamented that the trial Court failed to appreciate the fact that PW- 1 and the accused were in 4 sI<s,J Crl.A.No.103 of 2024 constant communication before lodging the complaint, as shown in Exhibit D-l (WhatsApp messages), where pW-l repeatedly mentioned the alleged affair of the appellant and financial demands but never mentioned aly sexual assault. PW- 1 admitted that she left the accused due to his alieged relationship with XXXXXXXX and later attempted to settle the matter through mediators, including PW-5, before hling the case out of revenge. He asserted that the trial Court ought to have appreciate the fact that in the admission of PW-2 that she actively participated in adult social media, openly admitted to lying -rrt,ipr. times, and continued to interact freely with both parents even after their separation.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant incessantly contended the trial Court erred in properly considering the fact that the presumption under Sections 29 and 30 of the POCSO Act is rebuttable and that the accused effectively countered it during cross-examination. Further that despite acknowledging the strained relationship between PW-1 and the accused, the trial Court did not extend the benefit of the doubt to the accused. He strongly reiterated that the precedents where the wives misused the POCSO Act to falsely implicate their husbands, 5 sKs,J Crl.A.No.1O3 of 2o24 but the trial Court failed to address or comment on these precedents. Fr-rrthermore, key witnesses PW-3 and pw-s did not support the prosecution, yet the trial Court disrregarded their testimonies. That apart, he alleged that PW- t tutored PW-2, and the trial Court failed to consider the said possibility and that the evidence would clearly establish that pW-l demanded {5 crores to settle the -.tt.., proving that the case was filed with false allegations purely to harass the accused.

7. In addilion, he contended that the trial Cour1. did not consider the responsibility of the accused towards his elderly parents, who are aged about 78 and 70 and are his dependents. He informed the Court that the appellant has already paid the fine of {2O,OO0 on 31-O1-2O24 and remained on bail throughout the trial after furnishing a personal bond of {10,000 with sureties. Therefore, tre prayed the Court to set aside the impugned judgment dated 31.01.2024 passed in S.C.PCS.No. 14 of 2O2O by allowing this Criminal Appeal. B. Per contra. the learned Public Prosecutor vetremently opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant, submrtting that the prosecution had successfully 5 SKS,J Crl.A.No.103 of2024 established the case against the appeliant beyond a reasonable doubt by examining PW-l to PW-7 and presenting Exhibits P1 to P8 as evidence. He contended that the testimony of victim (PW-2) was consistent and credible, highlighting that the accused who is her father, had repeatedly sexually assaulted her by inappropriately touching her private parts. He emphasized that under Sections 29 and 30 of the POCSO Act, there is a presumption of guilt in such cases unless the accused can rebut it with strong evidence, and that the accused failed to do so. He pointed out that the delay in filing the complaint was reasonable, considering the , emotional trauma of the victim and the hesitation of the family in reporting such incidents. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal appeal.

9. Having regard to the rival subrhissions, and on going through the material placed on record, it is noted that the i allegations levelled against the appellant are for the offences punishable Sections 354 of IPC and Sections 9(l) and (n) r/w Section 10 of POCSO Act. The case of the prosecution is that the appellant being the father of the victim, has sexually assaulted her. P.W.l is the mother of the victim and wife of 7 SKS,J Crt.A.No.1O3 of 2024 the appeltant, testified that the accused, her husband, sexually assaulted their daughter (PW-2) multiple tinres. PW- 2, the victirn, stated that the accused inappropriatell' touched her chest and private parts on multiple occasions between June 2O18 and August 2019. The prosecution also presented PW-3 (a circumstantial witness), PW-4 (a mediator for the crime scene observation), PW-5 (the landlord), PW-6 (the officer who recorded the victim's statement), and PW-7 (the investigating officer). Whilq PW-3 and PW-5 turned hostile, the prosecution relied on, the testimony of the victim, sttpported by her statement recorded under Section 164 CrPC, rvhereas, it is the specrhc stand of the appellant that th'e (lase was fabricated due lo ongoing matrimonial disputes, alleging that PW-1 used the POCSO Act as a tool to implicate lhe accused after failing to settle property and Iinancial demands. The 4ppellant also highlighted inconsistencies in witness testimonies, delays in lodging the complaint, and the victim's prior social merlia statements indicating she had a habit of lying. The [nvestigating Oflicer admitted that he did not examine certain key individuals, such as parents of PW-1, but maintained that the case was based on strong evidence. The sxs,J Crl.A.No.103 of 2024 accused denied all allegations, clalming that pW_ 1 falsely implicated him out of revenge.

10. On meticulous perusal of the record, it is seen that the allegations against the accused are levelled by his daughter herself, alleging that he has sexually assaulted her, whereas, the strong contention of learned counsel for the appellant is that as admitted by de facto complainant there is delay in lodging the report, and that the same would reveal their mala fide intention of P.W. t to implicate the appellant in false case using her daughter, and the provisions ofpOCSO as a tool. 1 1. The witness statements reveal signifrcant admissions regarding matrimonial disputes between the de facto complainant and the accused, due to the alleged affair of accused with one XXXXXXXX, meetingS between the accused, dhe victim, and the de facto complainant in hotels, celebration of birthday of victim, just before lodging the complaint, and the social media activity of the victim, wherein, she stated that she is habituated to lying. pW- I admitted during cross- examination that she suspected the accused of having al illicit relationship with XXXXXXXX, a family friend who 9 SKS,J Crl-A.No.103 of 2024 initially helped their children with studies but later became a source of conflict. PW-5 (the landlord and medrator) also conhrmed that PW- 1 informed him about the alleged affairs of the accused with multiple women, including XXXX)IXXX, and attempted reconciliation discussions. took place on 12- 10- 2019, where relatives of PW-1 insisted the accused apologize, but she later refused to reconcile. Despite these disputes, PW-I and PW-2 (the victim) admitted that they met the accused multrple times in hotels and restaurants even after their separation-

12. PW-2 confirmed that on 12-71-2019, just one day before the complaint r.vas filed, the accused gifted her watch on her birthday, and WhatsApp conversations (Exhibit D-1) between PW-1 and the accused showed no mention of sexual assault but focused on XXXXXXXX and financial demands. Additionally, PW-2 admitted to being highly active on social media and acknowledged posting a message stating that she had "lied a million times" to her teachers and saw nothing wrong with lying. That being so, it can be said that these social media posts which are marked as Exhibit D-2, would raise serious doubts about the credibility of the victim as the 10 sKs,J Crl.A.No.103 of 2024 same would open doors to the possibility of victim being coached or influenced, supporting the contention of the appellant that the case was a fabricated driven by the matrimonial disputes rather than genuine sexual assault allegations. Furthermore, PW-1 admitted that she was aware of the online activity of the P.W.2 but did not monitor or control it. Therefore, these admissions would support the contentions of the learned counsel for the appellant that the case was motrvated by personal disputes rather than genuine allegations of sexual assault, as PW- 1 allegedly used the POCSO Act to pressure the appellant into settling financial and property disputes.

13. At this stage, it is pertinent to note that though the trial Court proceeded with discussing the evidence of P.W. I and P.W.2 at length, but it failed to consider the admissions that are mentioned as above and the revelations made in Exs.Dl and D2. That being so, it is imperative to note that when there are presumptions against the accused the Court has to consider the evidence meticulously, and on meticulously going through Exs.Dl and D2, it is seen that, it is contradictory to the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2. 1-L SKS,J Crl.A.No.1O3 of 2024 Additionally,

14. In view ol the above discussion, it is evident that the allegations agarnst the appellant stem from ongorng matrimonial disputes between pW_ 1 (de facto cornplainant) and the accused, primarily due to her suspicion of his alleged affair with XXXXXXXX. The testimony of pW_2/victim is significantly undermined by contradictions, including Exs.D1 and D2/WhatsApp and Instagram content Ex.D-2 social media activity of the victim, wherein she admitted to habitual lying, raises serious doubts about her credibility and the possibility of coaching or influence. The delay in lodging the complaint further strengthens the contention of the appellant that pW_I strategically used the POCSO Act as a tool to implicate the accused, having previously attempted to settle disputes through jlnancial negotiations. Furthermore, the fact that pW_ I and pW_2 continued to meet the accused. clined together in hotels, and celebrated the birthday of pW_2 just before fiIlng the complaint contradicts the allegations levelled against the accused. I.

15. Basing on these admissions and contradictions, particularly the implications of Exs.D_ I and, D-2, which would I t 72 SKS,J Crl.A.No.1Og of 2024 I directly contradict the testimonies of pW-l and pW_2, and the serious inconsistencies which would open doors of strong possibility of fabrication, the case against the appellant appears to be a clear misuse of the pOCSO Act, driven by mala fide intentions rather than genuine allegations of sexual assault.

16. In view thereof, this Criminal Appeal is allowed setting aside the judgment dated 31.O1.2024 passed in S.C.PCS.No. 14 of 2O2ti by the I Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed SD/- C.V. MALLIKARJUNA VARMA JOINT REGISTRAR Note: That the name and personal information of the Petitioner and other name/s in the cause title and in the Judgment dated 07.03.2025 in Criminal Appeal No. 103 of 2024 are blurred as per the orders in l.A. No. 1 of 2025 dated 02.07.2025, at page Nos. 3,4,8,9 & 1 1. This amended order shall substitute the earlier order, which has already been dispatched on 24.03.2025. SDI C.V. MALLIKARJUNA VARMA" INT REGISTRAR. //TRUE COPY// CTION OFFICER ) '1 . The I Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad(With records,) To, '-cc'tJ-' -----7

2. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Chanchalguda, Hyderabad 3. The Station House Officer, Amberpet Police Station, Hyderabad 4. One CC to Sri P. Subash, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telanga4a at Hyderabad[OUT]

6. The Registrar (Judicial-l), High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad.

7. The Registrar (Judicial-ll), High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. B. Two CD Copies s HIGH COURT DATED:0710312025 DATED:0210712025 I , AMENDED JUDGMENT CRLA.No.103 of 2024 HE SI4 I Y oo O! JUL ?u5 z? * SP,\fC * ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL APPEAL cr'f-''