Dehradun POCSO Court Acquits Brothers in Rape Case, Citing Property Dispute as Motive
A special court in Dehradun handling cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act has acquitted two brothers of rape charges filed against them in 2023. The court determined that the allegations appeared to be fabricated as part of a property dispute between the families involved.
Court Observations and Key Findings
Additional District Judge Archana Sagar, presiding over the POCSO court, observed that the accused were falsely implicated to settle a familial conflict. The prosecution failed to establish the charges beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the acquittal. The case originated in June 2023 when the mother of a 17-year-old girl lodged an FIR, alleging that the two brothers, who resided in the same Dehradun locality, entered their home and sexually assaulted her daughter.
Inconsistencies in the Prosecution's Case
The court identified several critical inconsistencies that undermined the prosecution's narrative. During her testimony, the girl claimed one accused entered through the roof and the other via the main gate. However, investigation revealed that one brother had a fractured leg and was using a walker at the time, making it physically impossible for him to climb stairs or access the roof.
Initially, it was reported that the CCTV camera at the entrance was malfunctioning on the day of the alleged incident. Later, it was discovered that the CCTV system was fully operational, casting further doubt on the claims. Additionally, no medical examination of the girl was conducted after the alleged assault, and her grandmother testified that no one had entered the house that day.
Legal Proceedings and Outcome
The accused surrendered before the court in November 2023 and were granted bail on the same day. After thoroughly examining all evidence and hearing arguments from both sides, the court acquitted the two men of all charges on Wednesday. The judge also ordered the quashing of the FIR against them, concluding that the case was likely motivated by a property dispute rather than actual criminal conduct.
