Kanpur: Special Judge, Pocso Act Court of Kanpur Nagar, Raj Veer Singh, on Thursday sentenced one Pottar for anger at the simplicity of a girl and sentenced him to a strict five-year prison together with a fine of Rs 20,000.
Chief Judge in the order of observing that 50% of the good amount, i.e., Rs 10,000 given to victims as damage to medical and rehabilitation.
If the defendant failed to pay a fine, he had to suffer a period of one month in prison in prison.
According to additional district government advisors, Sushil Kumar Verma, a FIR was submitted by the Father of the victim who was a village population in Narwal Tehsil.
He stated that they stated that on September 16, 2016 his young daughter, a class XIIH student, returned from his school at around 2:30 p.m.
when Pattar, a village partner, arrested and dragged him to a field.
When he raised the alarm and the people got there, Pattar escaped.
He revealed that Pattar had hit him from the cycle from behind because he suddenly fell on the ground.
He made a loop from a scarf on his neck and was dragged into the nearest sugar cane field.
There he tapped the beat of his hand and tore his clothes.
He physically behaves badly with him.
His father claimed that he and others traced Pattar and arrested him near the Tonse River culverts.
Then, Pattar’s relatives released him from his prisoner.
The girl in his statement was recorded below the 164 CRPC section repeated the same facts.
Pattar in his defense claimed that the victim’s father had taken a loan of Rs 20,000 from him.
He has filed fake and fake firmly against him in an effort not to return money.
The chairman after leaving even though the evidence on the record holds the Pattar guilty and punish him accordingly.
Bail was rejected: In each other, the Chief Judge rejected the guarantee application of one goal, which had been sued by the police to exploit a little little girl.
The chairman’s official in the order of observing that according to the statement was recorded below the part 364 CRPC, the defendant seemed to have lured the girl and physically exploited her twice.
Violations are vile nature and there is no reason enough to release it on guarantees, the guarantee application is rejected.
Previously, during the argument accused of begging before a court that he was an orphan and produced sufficient livelihoods.
The victim’s father had taken a loan of RS 18,000 from him and did not return.
On his pressure, he used his daughter as part and submitted a false report to Him.
There is a big difference between statements recorded below 161 and 164 CRPC.
The victim changed his seat repeatedly.
He hasn’t received an external injury.
Therefore, he must be given a guarantee.