NT Reporter
Panaji
The Fast Track Special (POCSO) Court at Merces has discharged two men arrested in an alleged gang rape and wrongful confinement case involving a minor girl in Calangute, citing a lack of incriminating material linking them to the crime. The main accused, 28-year-old Praveena Ramesh Chouhan, continues to face proceedings.
The court allowed the discharge pleas filed by Akash alias Akshaya Pawar, 20, and Anil Rathod, 27, both residents of, Karnataka.
According to the prosecution, the victim had travelled to Calangute without informing her family. She allegedly met Chouhan, who gained her trust, took her to a guest house in
Candolim, locked her in a room and sexually assaulted her.
The prosecution alleged that between January 8 and 10, Chouhan called Pawar and Rathod to the room and that all three men repeatedly assaulted the girl.
The victim subsequently escaped and returned home. After she was found to be pregnant, a complaint was initially lodged at Shikaripura Rural Police Station in Karnataka. The matter was later transferred to Calangute police.
On examining the charge sheet, the court found deficiencies in the evidence against Pawar and Rathod. The victim had not named either man in the initial FIR, her father’s complaint or her earlier statements to the police. Although she referred to two other individuals in some subsequent statements, she did not identify them by name.
The court also noted that neither Shikaripura nor Calangute police had conducted a Test Identification Parade and there was no record explaining how the police identified and arrested the two men.
A forensic DNA analysis of the aborted foetus by the Regional Forensic Science Laboratory in Hubbali identified Chouhan as the biological father and ruled out a genetic link to Pawar and Rathod.
The owner of the Candolim guest house told police that she did not recall the trio or the girl checking in, and that there was no entry in the guest register.
The court also noted that no CCTV footage had been retrieved or examined.
Rejecting the prosecution’s argument against detailed examination of evidence at the trial stage, the court stated that, at the stage of framing charges, the material on record must be capable of sustaining a conviction if left unrebutted.
It concluded that there was no prima facie material to frame charges of rape and abduction or wrongful confinement against the two men and ordered their discharge.
