HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA,J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned counsel for the respondent no. 2. Also heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
(2.) The appellant has preferred this criminal appeal against the Judgment of acquittal dated 20.09.2017 passed by the Special Judge, POCSO Act, Samastipur, in Mahila P.S. Case No. 50 of 2014 by which and whereunder he acquitted the respondent no. 2 of the charge framed against him for the offences punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
(3.) It would appear from perusal of the Lower Court Record that the appellant lodged Mahila P.S. Case No. 50 of 2014 on 01.12.2014 to this effect that in the year 2008, while she had gone to ease herself, the respondent no. 2 committed rape on her on the point of dagger. She returned to her home and narrated the entire incident to her parents but when her parents went to make complain to the house of the respondent no. 2, they were abused and driven away from there. However, she further claimed that the respondent no. 2, on false promise of marriage with her, continued his sexual relation with her and when she became pregnant, the respondent no. 2 provided her tablet causing her abortion. Subsequently, the respondent no. 2 refused to solemnize his marriage.;