More than six years after he was accused of sexually harassing a minor, a 76-year-old man was acquitted by a special court in Mumbai last month, after it observed that the First Information Report (FIR) could be “motivated by personal animosity rather than a genuine grievance”. The FIR in the case was lodged on August 10, 2019, based on a complaint by a 10-year-old girl’s mother, who said that the accused had forcefully kissed the minor. Later, the man was booked under sections 354 and 354(A) of the Indian Penal Code on charges related to sexual harassment, and under relevant sections of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act. During the trial, three witnesses were examined. The minor’s mother had deposed that around 9.45 am, her daughter was going to deliver a tiffin to her mother-in-law, who stayed on another floor of their building, when the accused entered the lift and kissed her in the moving lift. Later that night, after the minor informed her about the incident and identified the person, she went to the accused’s house and slapped him, the mother said. Later that night, the minor’s parents went to the police station and filed a complaint. The accused had claimed that he was falsely implicated, as he had scolded the girl for playing with the lift buttons. He had claimed that the parents of the girl had assaulted him, without citing any reason, causing injuries to his head, face and eye, for which he underwent treatment at the hospital the same night. The accused had also said that he had approached the police, who had registered a non-cognizable report. He claimed that when the parents found out about this, they went to the police station to file an FIR. He had also raised doubts over why the girl had not told anybody if an incident had taken place, although she went to school, tuition class, and her grandparent’s home on the day. The girl’s mother had said that since she was frightened, she may not have informed anyone. What the court said “The victim girl PW-02 delayed disclosing the alleged incident despite being in contact with several trusted adults throughout the day, including her father, grandmother, and tuition teacher. PW-01 (mother) admitted that the FIR was lodged only after a confrontation with the accused, and PW-02’s cross-examination revealed an alternate version that she was scolded for playing with the lift, which angered her parents,” special judge S A Malik said in the order passed on September 29, made public recently. The judge said that the accused had brought before it the doctor who examined him after the assault, which it said, gives credibility to his claim that the FIR was filed as a counter move following a personal dispute between the minor’s family and him. The court also noted that there were several contradictions in the testimony of the victim and her mother. “The absence of any corroborative testimony from independent witnesses, such as school teachers, neighbours, father or the grandmother, and the lack of medical or psychological evidence to support the claim of trauma, further harms the credibility of the prosecution,” the court said. “Collectively, these factors cast serious doubt on the prosecution’s version and support the defence claim that the FIR was motivated by personal animosity rather than a genuine grievance,” the court added. The man, who was granted bail pending trial, was acquitted of all charges.
