STATE vs HITESH

Judgment text excerpt

$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 30.01.2025 + CRL.L.P. 10/2022 STATE .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Yudhvir Singh Chauhan, APP with SI Himanshu, PS Jaffarpur Kalan Versus HITESH .....Respondent Through: Mr. Vinay Kumar Sharma, Mr. Prince, Mr. Aaditya, Ms. Ritu Kumari, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH : JASMEET SINGH, J (ORAL) 1. This is an application filed by the State seeking leave to appeal challenging the judgment dated 10.02.2020 passed by the learned ASJ- 04 (POCSO), South-West, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi in SC No. 440648/2016 arising out of FIR No. 317/2014 registered at PS Jaffarpur under Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (“POCSO Act”). 2. Vide impugned judgement, the respondent was acquitted under Section 4 of POCSO Act. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 3. The brief facts of the case are that on 10.12.2014 at about 12:25 AM, the father of the prosecutrix registered a complaint regarding the missing of Digitally Signed CRL.L.P. 10/2022 Page 1 of 16 By:MAYANK Signing Date:14.02.2025 19:19:41 his daughter aged about 17 years and studying in Class 12th. The prosecutrix had gone for tuition but did not return home. The complainant expressed his doubt on the respondent who was also missing from his house. 4. During the course of investigation, the prosecutrix and the respondent were apprehended on 12.12.2014 at Dharuhera and were brought to Delhi. 5. The prosecutrix was medically examined and her statement under Section 164 CrPC was recorded. The respondent was also arrested. 6. On 06.08.2015, charges under Section 4 of the POCSO Act were framed against the respondent, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 7. The prosecution examined a total of 12 witnesses and the statement of the accused u