A Delhi court has acquitted a man of the charges of kidnapping, sexually assaulting and trying to kill a three-year-old girl, saying there was no evidence to prove his guilt.
"Mere suspicion, however, strong or probable it may be, is no effective substitute for the legal proof required to substantiate the charge of commission of a crime and grave the charge is greater should be the standard of proof required," Additional Sessions Judge Gautam Manan said.
The court said that medical report of the child proved she was sexually assaulted and that the accused was present near the incident spot, but it could not be proved that he did it.
More From This Section
The court, while acquitting him, noted that forensic report and the chain of circumstances could not connect Raju to the crime.
"Forensic report does not connect the accused with the crime. The chain of circumstances brought against him do not rule out the possibility of some other person committing the crime," it said.
It also observed that from the testimony of the girl's father, who had lodged the complaint, it was clear that he had not seen the accused taking her away and there was no evidence to prove that Raju was seen with her.
"On appreciating the testimony of the complainant it becomes clear that he did not see the accused taking his daughter away. The prosecution has not examined any witness who could depose that the accused was seen with the victim.
"Merely, the fact the accused was seen consuming liquor near the shanty of the complainant... Does not connect the accused with the crime," the court said.
According to the prosecution, on the night of March 25, 2013, the girl's father had asked Raju not to consume liquor near his shanty but he refused and threatened him.
Thereafter, the girl's father and his family members slept, it said, adding that when he woke up in the middle of the night, he could not find his daughter and after hours of searching for her, she was found lying naked and unconscious near bushes in the morning.
During the trial, the accused had pleaded not guilty and claimed that he was falsely implicated.