New Delhi: A man has been acquitted of charges of raping an 11-year-old differently abled child after kidnapping her by a Delhi court which refused to rely on the girl's testimony as she was suffering from mental retardation and seizure disorder.
Additional Sessions Judge Illa Rawat absolved UP native Arvind Kumar of the charges of kidnapping and raping the girl while saying "her testimony alone cannot be relied upon to convict Kumar especially in view of the report given by a medical board that she was suffering from mental retardation and seizure disorder."
The court, while acquitting Kumar, said that the girl's family members also did not depose the details of what the child had explained to them about her alleged kidnapping and rape.
It also noted that when the child was found in UP, she was playing in a park with other kids and was not confined.
"At the time of recovery, the victim child was playing with other children between the cluster of shanties and the shanty of the accused was also a part of the cluster.
"Nothing has been placed on record by the investigating officer which would lead to conclusion that the jhuggi in which the accused was residing was in his exclusive possession," it said, while adding "there is no person who saw Kumar taking away the victim child".
The court also said "the medical report of the girl proved that she was sexually assaulted but it couldn't be established that the accused was responsible for the same".
According to the prosecution, on February 16, 2011 the girl went missing from her residence in Delhi, after which her father lodged a police complaint.
A week later, the police, on a tip-off, found the girl in a village in UP and arrested Kumar, on the basis of statements of the village head and the victim's parents, it said.
Charges for the offences under sections 363 (kidnapping), 365(kidnapping with intent to wrongfully confine a person), 366A(procuration of minor girl) and 376 (2)(f)(rape of a girl below the age of 12 years) of the IPC were framed against Kumar.
During the trial, the accused had pleaded innocence and claimed he was falsely implicated by the victim's family.