Consent under threat is not valid in law. Victim's age must be determined by appropriate legal standards to ensure protection under the POCSO Act.

JUDGMENT

1. Accused in Sessions Case No.06 of 2013 on the file of the learned Special Judge Constituted under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act-cum-I Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur [for short, "trial Court"], is the appellant herein. He was tried for the offence punishable under Sec. 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 [for short, "POCSO Act"] and Sec. 506(2) of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 [for short, "IPC"].

2. Vide Judgment, dtd. 29/9/2015, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the Accused under Sec. 235(2) of Cr. P.C. Accordingly, he was sentenced to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for Ten (10) Years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000.00 (Rupees Ten Thousand only) for the offence punishable under Sec. 6 of the POCSO Act. However, the accused was acquitted under Sec. 235(1) of Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable under Sec. 506(2) of IPC.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to as arrayed before the trial Court.

4. Considering the nature of the crime, I am not disclosing the names of victim, members of her family, as well as the witnesses of that area (locality); therefore, wherever required, they have been described by their witness number.

5. The prosecution case, as elucidated in the written report-Ex.P1, dt.13/5/2013 submitted by PW.1, unfolds as follows: Approximately, four months before submitting Ex.P1 report, the accused visited her residence, in the absence of her mother. He compelled her to participate in sexual intercourse and resorted menacing threats, even going to the extent of brandishing knife to threaten self harm by stabbing himself in the neck; he tied a thail around her neck infront of image of Lord Jesus proclaiming her as his wife. She believed his version and had sexual intercourse with him. Notably, the accused's brother's wedding was slated for 26/6/2013. Approximately, two weeks before this event, the accused revisited her house. At this juncture, she requested him to disclose their relationship to his parents. However, his response was callous as he declared his intention to marry his niece i.e., sister's daughter. She revealed her pregnancy, but the accused denied any responsibility for the paternity. Subsequently, P.W.1 in conjunction with P.W.2 (the victim's mother) and P.W.3 (the victim's sister) went to Nagarampalem Police Station and lodged Ex.P1 report.

6. Based on the report, the Police registered as a case in Crime No.199 of 2013 under Sec. 420, 376, 509 of IPC of Nagarampalem Police Station. Ex.P9 is the F.I.R. During the course of investigation, the Investigation Officer recorded the statements from various witnesses including the victim. The Investigation Officer gathered the medical evidence and other relevant evidence. Subsequently, the accused was arrested. Upon concluding the investigation, the Investigation officer, P.W.15 submitted a charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Ss. 420, 376, 509 of IPC and Ss. 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act.

7. The Special Judge Constituted under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act -cum-I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Guntur, has taken on file as Sessions Case No.06 of 2013. On appearance, furnished the copies of the documents to the accused under Sec. 207 Cr.P.C. Based on the materi