A Dehradun court has acquitted a foreign student accused of raping a foreign woman studying at a private university, sharply criticising the police investigation and calling the probe under the zero FIR “seriously flawed”. The case was registered in October 2024 at Kashmiri Gate police station in Delhi under zero FIR and later transferred to Dehradun for investigation.
While delivering the verdict on Friday, the court observed that the investigation carried out by Clement Town police lacked basic scientific rigor. The court noted that the investigating officer ignored standard forensic procedures, which weakened the prosecution’s case and ultimately benefited the accused.
According to the prosecution, the victim, a South African national pursuing graduation in Dehradun, alleged that she was sexually assaulted while she was asleep after a farewell party attended by students of her institution. The accused, identified as Musa alias Moja Mojiz Ladu James from South Sudan, was arrested based on her complaint.
However, Additional District and Sessions Judge Rajni Shukla, while acquitting the accused of all charges, made strong remarks against the then investigating officer, Sub-Inspector Sanjeet Kumar. The court pointed out that despite allegations of sexual assault during sleep, the police failed to seize bed sheets, clothes, or other material evidence from the spot for forensic examination, which is considered a basic investigative step in such cases.
During cross-examination, the victim admitted that she and her friends had consumed alcohol at the party and that she could not clearly recall who touched her or at what time. Witnesses, including other foreign students present at the party, stated that the accused and the victim slept in separate rooms. One witness told the court that he heard the victim shouting at night but believed it could have been due to a bad dream, and confirmed that the accused was not present in her room at that time.
The court concluded that the prosecution failed to establish the charges beyond reasonable doubt, largely due to gaps in investigation and lack of corroborative evidence. The judgment has once again raised questions about the quality of investigation in sensitive cases transferred under zero FIR, especially when timely and scientific evidence collection is ignored.
