ii) Surprisingly, the court relied on the evidence on record, which does not clinch the issue in favour of the victim at all. It may be noted that the victim girl and both her parents were consistent in their assertion that the accused gagged the victim with a handkerchief, causing her to fall unconscious. However, the statement of the victim under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure entirely omits any reference to such gagging. Rather, the victim girl stated that she was taken from her school by the accused and she, thereafter, became senseless. Nothing has been stated in such statement regarding the reason of her becoming senseless and/or any allegation made regarding gagging or anything being shoved into the mouth of the victim by the accused or any other person. Rather, the victim girl goes on to make the contradictory statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that, since the accused tried to touch her indecently, she shouted out, which is not expected normally from a senseless person. In any event, according to the statement of the victim girl herself, immediately upon shouting out, the accused did not do anything further to her.
