Panchkula, Sept. 29 -- Observing that the prosecution evidence was "marred by material contradictions" and lacked the "requisite consistency, reliability and cogency", a POCSO court acquitted a 22-year-old man from Zirakpur in a case alleging kidnapping of a 16-year-old girl and attempt to commit penetrative sexual assault. The court held that the cumulative effect of the evidence "does not inspire the confidence of the court" and that the prosecution had failed to prove the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. According to the prosecution case, the girl was allegedly taken by the accused on December 9, 2023, after he called her to his shop in Dhakoli on the pretext of taking her to Ambala to meet his relatives. The prosecution alleged that during the train journey, the accused gave her a cold drink after which she became unconscious, and she later regained consciousness in Mumbai. She allegedly called her father using a stranger's phone from Mumbai railway station, following which her father and nephew travelled by air and brought her back. The prosecution further alleged that the accused attempted to establish physical relations with her. The court pointed to several gaps in the police investigation. It noted that the investigating agency did not collect call detail records, customer application forms (CAFs) or tower-location data, seize the phones of the victim, accused or the stranger whose phone was allegedly used, or examine the stranger. No travel tickets or other documents were produced to corroborate the father's claim that he travelled to Mumbai by air. The victim's cousin, who allegedly accompanied her father, was also not examined. Inspector Bachu Singh was the investigating officer (IO) in the case. The court also noted that no official from the coaching centre was examined and neither attendance records nor CCTV footage was produced. No site plan of the Dhakoli shop or Mumbai railway station was prepared. The court ultimately held that the prosecution failed to prove the charges and extended the benefit of doubt to the accused....