Hajin child sodomy case: Court upholds judgement

Hajin child sodomy case: Court upholds judgement
  • 3
    Shares

Bandipora: The court of Principal Sessions Judge, Bandipora, S.K Bhagat on Saturday upheld the judgement passed by a judicial magistrate first class (JMIC), in the sodomy case of an eight-year-old boy from North Kashmir’s Hajin town.
The appeal of the accused in the case, Feroz Ahmad Khan, S/O Bashir Ahmad Khan Vs State through P/S Hajin in FIR No. 73/2002 U/S 377/RPC, to set aside the JMIC’s judgement, passed on 22 May this year, was dismissed, stating that the appeal was meritless, and upholding that “the Accused be sentenced to three years in prison and fine of 5000 or in default has to spend three more months in the prison”.
Appearing on behalf of the State, public prosecutor Shafeeq Ahmad filed objections averring that the judgement passed by the Ld. JMIC Sumbal is well founded and is good in the eyes of the law, so does not require any interference but deserves to be upheld in the interest of justice.
As per the prosecution, the complainant (the victim’s father) had filed a written complaint with the Hajin police on 14 May 2002 stating that his eight-year-old son had been taken by the accused, Feroz, to his house where the accused had then committed an unnatural act with him, due to which blood started oozing out of his anus apart from occasioning great pain. The police thereafter launched an F.I.R and an investigation was started.
The statements of five witnesses were recorded including the statement of the victim, who was only eight years old at the time of the offence.
The offence was proved, and the charge was framed against the accused on 6 Nov 2013 by Ld. JMIC Sumbal, and the statements of five prosecution witnesses were recorded during trial. The statement of the minor, aged 10 at the time of making his statement, was corroborated by the statement of Dr. Ishtiyaq Ahmad, who had examined the victim. Prosecution witness testimony was closed on 26 December 2012.
“No parent would falsely implicate his own minor son due to the social stigma attached to such kind of offence. Therefore the argument of the learned counsel for the accused/applicant that victim received injury during a bath seems to be hypothetic, vague, indefinite and fallacious,” reads an excerpt from the 15-page judgement.
“In the present facts and circumstances of the case, this court is of the view that the criminal appeal preferred by the applicant/accused of setting aside the impugned judgment dated 17-05-2017 passed by Ld. JMIC Sumbal is meritless, hence dismissed. The accused shall undergo a sentence imposed upon him. The order passed by Ld. JMIC Sumbal Dated 17-05-2017 is hereby upheld and file disposed of,” the order concludes.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.