Kerala Court Acquits Maulvi of Rape Charges in POCSO Case as Victim Boy Turns Hostile

A maulvi of a mosque in Kerala recently walked away from charges of raping an underage boy. The POCSO Special Court noted that there may have been an out-of-court settlement.

According to the case recorded by the civil police officer of Miele Police Station, the alleged rape took place in the bedroom of the accused attached to a mosque. Rafiq allegedly placed himself on an 11-year-old boy with sexual intent in his bedroom attached to the mosque. Accordingly, the police booked him under Section 7, which was read together with Sections 8, 9 and 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act (POCSO) 2012.

Initially, the investigation report was brought before the Additional Sessions and District Court – First, Thalassery. The same report was later handed over to a special court in POCSO.

The court upheld all charges against Rafiq and secured his release on bail. After the bail period expired, he appeared in court and pleaded not guilty. Warranty has been extended.

In court, the Islamic priest did not present any witnesses on his part. On the contrary, the prosecution brought three witnesses: the survivor, his friend, and police witness Suresh Babu B. K. He was also the investigating officer in the case.

The accused was interrogated under Article 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This section gives the court the power to question the accused in the manner it deems necessary. The accused is not under oath and can explain everything related to the incriminating evidence. Even if he gives false answers, the accused is not punished.

After that, both parties were given opportunities under Article 232 of the Competition Protection Act. The oath provides for acquittal if the judge finds no evidence. Until the end of the process under this section, there was evidence against the accused and he could not produce any supporting evidence to give effect to his acquittal. However, at the time of recording the testimonies and questioning the witnesses, the survivor turned hostile.

The court did not question the surviving child’s competence as a witness. According to Sri Jomon John, the Special Judge, the 13-year-old at the time of examination before the court, was found to be able to give reasoned answers. The child explicitly denied being subjected to any form of sexual abuse.

When asked if he had signed the first information statement that could incriminate Mulvey, the child answered in the affirmative. On the other hand, he expressed his disagreement with what was stated in the statement he made before the police. The second witness, also a friend of the survivor, weakened the case by declaring his ignorance. Even the most vigorous questioning by a special prosecutor cannot lead to any substantive conclusion.

“Although PW1 and PW2 were declared hostile to the prosecution and were vigorously cross-examined by the beneficiary special prosecutor, nothing was extracted from their mouths in support of the prosecution. It appears from their testimony that the whole matter was settled out of court,” the judge said.

The investigating officer who appeared as the third witness presented many documents containing investigations and reports. The court noted: “Khula has conducted the investigation and filed a final report against the accused. However, since the physical witnesses did not support the allegation, the PW3 evidence assumes no significance.”

After examining every piece of evidence and statement, the court came to the conclusion that the Public Prosecution Service had failed to prove Maulvi’s guilt. At the same time, Special Judge Sri Jomon John also made a serious note.

“From the physical evidence on PW1, nothing was collected to believe that the accused had committed any of the crimes charged. It was concluded from the evidence on PW1 that the entire matter was settled out of court,” the judge noted.

Read all the latest India news and Karnataka elections 2023 update here