8 yrs on, school vice-principal acquitted in student's rape case

Saurabh Malik

Advertisement

Chandigarh, August 11

A school vice-principal, accused of raping a student, will walk free after undergoing more than eight years of imprisonment.

Falsely implicated

The jealousy factor of the impending promotions could have been the cause for falsely implicating the appellant, apart from the lack of medical evidence which we have been confronted with for which the benefit of the doubt would necessarily go to him. The conviction was based solely on the victim’s statement. HC Bench

Acquitting him, the Punjab and Haryana High Court said it was highly improbable that a minor girl, sexually abused by her teacher on more than one occasion, would not disclose this either to her parents, teacher or any of her class fellows.

The matter was placed before the Bench of Justice Gurmeet Singh Sandhawalia and Justice Vikas Suri after the accused challenged Jind Additional Sessions Judge’s order convicting and sentencing him to 14 years’ rigorous imprisonment in September 2013 for rape under Sections 376 (2) (f) (i) of the IPC and the provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

The appellant-accused, in his statement before the court, claimed false implication on the grounds that the victim’s uncle, teaching in the same school, was inimical towards him and had hatched a controversy with another person to prevent him from getting promoted as the school principal after the present incumbent’s retirement. His counsel Vikram Singh Punia also contended that the victim was not reliable, as there were contradictions in her statements.

The Bench, among other things, asserted that there was an unexplained delay of six months between the incident stated to have occurred in March 2013 and the FIR lodging in September 2013. It also took note of the fact that the family had taken a matter to Jind SDM on an issue arising out of some incident in the school, in which the appellant could be responsible for disciplinary proceedings, being the vice-principal. “The jealousy factor of the impending promotions could have been the cause for falsely implicating the appellant, apart from the lack of medical evidence which we have been confronted with for which the benefit of the doubt would necessarily go to him,” the Bench asserted.

It added that the conviction was based solely on the victim’s statement. It was strange even the father was given up as a witness by the prosecution. He could have thrown some light on what had transpired before the SDM. The Bench observed: “The entire motive was the allurement to show the maths paper to the victim and nothing has come on record to show that she was poor in her studies or in that subject, which would warrant her to be tempted by this allurement. Rather, it has come on record that she obtained good marks in her Class XI examination…”