Examiner Bureau | Jammu:
A Fast Track Court in Jammu has acquitted a man accused of raping his niece, holding that the prosecution had failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt and describing the police investigation as “fabricated, botched and concocted.”
The judgment was delivered on May 29, 2026, by Amarjeet Singh Langeh, Presiding Officer of the Fast Track Court, Jammu, in a case arising out of FIR No. 90/2022 registered at Police Station R.S. Pura under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The court acquitted the accused, Subash Chopra, a resident of Ward No. 2, R.S. Pura, Jammu, and directed the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Jammu, to initiate a departmental inquiry against the investigating officer and the then Station House Officer (SHO) of Police Station R.S. Pura. The court also ordered initiation of proceedings under Section 182 of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC) against the complainant for allegedly lodging a false complaint.
Allegations and Prosecution Case
According to the prosecution, the complainant, a 20-year-old college student whose identity has been withheld, approached Police Station R.S. Pura on May 14, 2022, alleging that her uncle had entered her room during the night and sexually assaulted her after physically overpowering her.
Police registered an FIR and arrested the accused the following day. After completion of the investigation, a chargesheet was filed before the court.
During the trial, the prosecution examined eleven witnesses, including the complainant, her mother, brother, two NGO workers, medical experts and the investigating officer. The prosecution was represented by Additional Public Prosecutor Ajay Dogra, while the accused was defended by Chief Legal Aid Defence Counsel Anil Sharma.
Court Finds Serious Contradictions
After examining the evidence and witness testimonies, the court found what it described as significant inconsistencies, improbabilities and deficiencies in the prosecution’s case.
In its detailed judgment, the court observed that the allegations did not inspire confidence and that the conduct of the complainant, family members and investigating agency raised substantial doubts regarding the prosecution’s version of events.
The court noted that despite allegations that the accused remained in the complainant’s room for an extended period and sexually assaulted her twice, no member of the joint family residing in the same house reported hearing any cries, alarm or disturbance.
The judgment observed that the absence of any immediate reaction or outcry was a factor that weakened the prosecution’s case and made the allegations difficult to reconcile with the surrounding circumstances presented before the court.
Conduct After the Alleged Incident Examined
The court also scrutinised the complainant’s conduct following the alleged incident.
According to the judgment, instead of immediately approaching family members, the complainant first contacted her brother, who was outside Jammu at the time, and subsequently became involved with two women associated with an NGO.
The court noted that after registration of the FIR, the complainant stayed at a One Stop Centre in Jammu for nearly two weeks rather than with her family. The judgment stated that the circumstances surrounding this decision remained inadequately explained during the trial.
Medical Evidence Weighed Heavily
A significant factor in the acquittal was the medical evidence placed before the court.
The complainant underwent medical examination within hours of filing the FIR. However, the medical report did not record any visible injuries, marks of violence or evidence suggestive of recent sexual intercourse.
The court observed that while medical evidence alone may not always determine the outcome of sexual assault cases, the absence of corroborative medical findings assumed significance in light of the specific allegations made in the case.
Family Testimonies Found Inconsistent
The testimonies of the complainant’s mother and brother were also examined in detail.
The court noted that the complainant’s mother stated during her deposition that her daughter had initially informed her that “nothing had happened.” The complainant’s brother, meanwhile, testified that NGO workers had played a central role in pursuing the matter and that some relatives had questioned the decision to approach the police.
The court held that these statements further weakened the consistency of the prosecution’s case.
Questions Raised Over NGO Intervention
The judgment also discussed the role of two prosecution witnesses associated with an NGO.
The court observed that one of the witnesses, identified as Richa Abrol, who claimed association with an NGO named Muskan Foundation, appeared to have played an unusually active role in the registration and pursuit of the criminal case.
According to the court, the witness’s involvement went beyond that of a facilitator and raised concerns regarding the manner in which the complaint was pursued.
The judgment stated that the registration of the FIR appeared to have been influenced by external intervention rather than arising solely from an independent complaint by the victim or her immediate family.
Investigation Criticised
The court delivered strong criticism of the police investigation, highlighting what it described as serious procedural lapses.
Among the shortcomings identified were delays in recording the complainant’s statement under Section 164 CrPC, delayed inspection of the alleged crime scene, failure to obtain call detail records, inadequate examination of CCTV footage, non-association of crucial witnesses and failure to collect relevant evidence concerning the complainant’s family circumstances.
The court observed that the investigation lacked objectivity and thoroughness, ultimately concluding that the accused had been implicated in a case that was not supported by reliable evidence.
“Whole investigation therefore is fabricated, botched and concocted and accused has been framed up in a frivolous case by deliberate manipulation,” the court observed in its judgment.
Acquittal and Directions
Acquitting the accused, the court held that the prosecution had failed to establish the charge beyond reasonable doubt and that the evidence on record was insufficient to support conviction.
The court noted that the accused had remained incarcerated for more than one year and seven months during the pendency of the proceedings.
Consequently, the accused was acquitted of all charges, and his bail and surety bonds were discharged. The court further directed that any seized property be dealt with in accordance with law after the expiry of the appeal period.
In addition, the court directed the Inspector General of Police, Jammu, to initiate a departmental inquiry against the investigating officer and the then SHO of Police Station R.S. Pura for their role in the investigation.
The court also ordered initiation of legal proceedings against the complainant under Section 182 RPC for allegedly providing false information to law enforcement authorities.
