PANAJI
A seven year-old girl was raped in the toilet of her school at Vasco on January 14, 2013.
Two separate offences were registered in the case. The first offence was booked against an unknown person for raping the child. This case was probed by Mormugao Police and was later handed over to the Crime Branch before being registered and probed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in September 2013.
The second offence was registered against Sharlet Furtado, the headmistress at the school run by Mormugao Port Trust (MPT), the class-teacher and the head clerk for destruction of evidence and child abuse. CBI declined to probe this case stating that it did not bear a connection with the primary offence.
Parents of the survivor had complained that the child was bathed, her inner-wear washed and that the toilet was cleaned by the school staffers in the aftermath of the offence.
Accordingly, Mormugao Police had booked the trio under Sections 336, 337 read with 34 of IPC, Section 8 of Goa Children's Act and 3 (2) of SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act. This case was investigated by Mormugao Deputy Superintendent of Police and was later chargesheeted under Section 201 (causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false information to screen offender) of IPC and Section 8 (child abuse) of Goa Children's Act. Arguing before the Children's Court, defence counsel Kautuk Raikar said that the case booked against the three school officials is missing ‘mens rea', a fundamental principle in criminal law which refers to a criminal intent and guilty mind. Adv Raikar argued that the class teacher, who washed the child's innerwear and cleansed her body, had no relation with the offender, who has yet to be traced by the CBI.
Defence stressed that the three accused school staffers had no relation with the offender and hence were not screening him from the law enforcement agencies. It was also argued that the class teacher cleansed the child not out of any malafide tendency but as a natural response to seeing blood on a child's body.
By discharging the accused, the court has upheld the defence argument that there is no prima facie evidence to sustain the offence of child abuse against the three accused and that there is no sufficient evidence which can be legally translated into an argument at later stages of a trial.
The Judicial Magistrate First Class on February 16 this year adjourned the hearing, even as CBI sought the closure
of the rape case, having failed to trace the unknown accused.
COURT VERDICT
No prima facie evidence to sustain offence of child abuse against the three accused; No sufficient evidence which can be legally translated into an argument at later stages of a trial.
