Court duty officer exposes irregularities in rape case trial
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/5401b/5401bc5c43d87ad96d9e5f20002dc8a037494fa5" alt="Court duty officer exposes irregularities in rape case trial Court duty officer exposes irregularities in rape case trial"
Timely action and investigation by a court duty officer exposed irregularities in producing evidence by a public prosecutor (PP) and the assistant public prosecutor (APP) that led to the acquittal of an accused in a 2016 rape case. (Image: DC)
Hyderabad: Timely action and investigation by a court duty officer exposed irregularities in producing evidence by a public prosecutor (PP) and the assistant public prosecutor (APP) that led to the acquittal of an accused in a 2016 rape case.
Taking note of this, Cyberabad commissioner Avinash Mohanty submitted a detailed report to the department of prosecution (DoP) to look into the matter and take strict action against the PP and the APP.
In 2016, a woman had lodged a complaint with the Sanathnagar police against a 28-year-old man, who she was in love with. Consequently, a case was registered under Section 376 of the IPC. Both the accused and the victim belonged to different religions.
In 2016, a woman had lodged a complaint with the Sanathnagar police against a 28-year-old man, who she was in love with. Consequently, a case was registered under Section 376 of the IPC. Both the accused and the victim belonged to different religions.
The accused was a native of Palnadu district, working in an IT company in Gachibowli. The victim was his colleague. Being on the same team for quite some time, the two started liking each other. However, later differences started to mount between them.
After registering the FIR, the district magistrate recorded the statement of the victim under Section 164 of the CrPC. However, in January 2017, the woman had a visitor identifying himself as a court constable. She was further asked to meet the APP. The woman was then influenced and asked to withdraw the case in return for some money and she agreed.
After registering the FIR, the district magistrate recorded the statement of the victim under Section 164 of the CrPC. However, in January 2017, the woman had a visitor identifying himself as a court constable. She was further asked to meet the APP. The woman was then influenced and asked to withdraw the case in return for some money and she agreed.
The trial began at the LB Nagar court in April 2022. In January 2024, the victim was identified as the first witness by the court.
During the final proceedings of the case, the victim changed her statement. Subsequently, the court acquitted the accused in November 2024.
During the final proceedings of the case, the victim changed her statement. Subsequently, the court acquitted the accused in November 2024.
Speaking to Deccan Chronicle, Cyberabad commissioner Mohanty said, “We usually analyse why an acquittal takes place. On investigation after the acquittal, our court duty officer discovered this and informed us. Following this, we brought it to the notice of the Prosecution Review Committee (PRC) and in December, we sent a report to the department of prosecution to ensure action against those responsible for the acquittal.”
( Source : Deccan Chronicle )
Next Story