Kareena Eugene
(As per Supreme Court directives on cases related to sexual assault, the identity of the victim here has not been revealed to protect her privacy.)
A year and a half delay termed as “unnatural” in lodging an FIR has led to the acquittal of a 42-year-old Deputy Income Tax Commissioner. In 2017, he was accused of sexually assaulting his domestic help aged 13 years.
The special POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences) Act Court questioned the child’s family member as to why they had not filed a case straight after the incident occurred.
The member of the child’s family was employed in the maternal house of the estranged wife of the accused for decades.
The accused and his wife are in the midst of their divorce proceedings. The woman had lodged a domestic violence case against him.
The accused said that he was falsely implicated by his wife and her politically-connected family. The wife alleged that she, her sister, and her child were threatened in their village after this incident.
The Court observed that ‘while it was probable the minor’s character would not have been put at stake merely because of a dispute between the accused and his wife, the conduct of the prosecution witnesses and inordinate delay in lodging the FIR created sufficient doubt in the prosecution’s case’.
In 2018, the accused was arrested but thereafter, granted bail. In 2016, the minor and her sister had come to the city to live with the accused and his wife so that they could help in taking of their daughter. They were set to join a school and pursue further studies. Later in 2017, they went back to their village.
The minor testified that the accused had threatened to release her nude pictured if she complains to anyone. The Court then pointed that the minor admitted that she would latch the bathroom door before bathing.
The Court stated that, “So, it is unbelievable that the accused had snapped nude photographs of the minor with his mobile phone. Even if it is considered that the accused only threatened to make viral her photographs for molesting her, the questions remain as to why the investigating officer had not made an inquiry or seized that phone of accused to verify if he has nude photographs of the minor”.
