JAMMU: Principal Sessions Judge Jammu Vinod Chatterji Koul on Monday discharged accused Bodh Raj, son of Rattan Lal, resident of Upper Barnai booked by the Police Station Domana under Sections 363, 109 and 342 RPC, and 11 and 12 POCSO Act, at the stage of framing charge.
While discharging the accused, the court observed that as per the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164-A Cr.P.C, she has not implicated the accused in the present case. “She has only deposed that as their motorcycle had some fault and they met the accused Bodh Raj, who took them to his room and kept them in the room and locked the room from outside and went to call the mechanic. She got frightened and made noise due to which some people of the area came there and accused Bodh Raj opened the door and they both came out”, the court observed adding that the material on record do not show or suggest anywhere that the accused herein has committed any illegal act with her.
Principal Sessions Judge Jammu observed that this court fails to understand as to how the investigating officer has implicated the accused in the present case and as to how he has come to the conclusion that the accused has committed the offences punishable under aforesaid Sections.
“The investigating officer has not applied his mind to the facts of the case. It appears from the record that he had been in a hurry in imposing liability upon the accused than in investigating the matter in proper manner and in the right perspective. The investigating officer has evaded and violated all the canons of criminal jurisprudence and he appears to have roped in innocent person for the commission of offence. This court feels constrained to express its displeasure against the investigating officer who has conducted investigation of the case”, Principal Sessions Judge Jammu observed.
“The investigating officer has conducted the investigation in a casual manner without adopting the Procedure contained in the Code and the accused in these circumstances cannot be charged for the commission of the aforesaid offences”, the court observed adding that the accused being so discharged is entitled to be released from the custody in the present case. “A docket shall go to the Superintendent of concerned jail directing him to release the accused from custody, provided he is not involved in any other case”, the court held.