The immediate disclosure of a sexual offence by a child victim, corroborated by credible testimony, can be crucial in establishing the prosecution's case beyond reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT

Sarang V. Kotwal, J. - The appellant has challenged the judgment and order dated 20.2.2019 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge for Greater Bombay in POCSO Special Case No.151/2016. The appellant was convicted and sentenced as follows :

i. He was convicted for commission of the offence punishable under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 6 and 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, 'POCSO Act') and was sentenced to suffer RI for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer RI for six months.

The appellant was granted set off under Section 428 of Cr.P.C. Learned Trial Judge directed that the fine amount, if recovered from the appellant, shall be paid to the victim towards compensation in view of Section 357 of Cr.P.C.. The District Legal Services Authority was recommended for providing adequate compensation to the victim as per the provisions of Section 357-A of Cr.P.C.

2. Heard Shri Ganesh Bhujbal, learned appointed counsel for the appellant, Shri S.R. Agarkar, learned APP for the respondent No.1-State and Shri Veerdhaval Kakade, learned appointed counsel for the respondent No.2.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the appellant was a relative of the victim's father. The victim was five years of age at the time of incident dated 15.2.2016. The date of birth of the victim was 10.11.2011. On that date, in the evening the victim was taken by his father to his factory. He was left in the custody of the appellant and other co-workers. After some time the appellant dropped the victim to the victim's house. The victim told his mother about the offence committed by the appellant. The description of the offence fulfills all the ingredients of Section 377 of IPC and other sections of POCSO Act. The victim's mother informed the victim's father. Then the police were informed. The FIR was lodged vide C.R. No.80/2016 at Wadala T.T. Police Station. The appellant was arrested. Statements of the witnesses were recorded. The appellant and the victim were sent for medical examination. Medical swabs from the mouth of the victim were collected. The clothes were collected. The articles were sent for chemical analysis. At the conclusion of the investigation, charge-sheet was filed and the case was committed to the Special Court.

4. During trial, the prosecution examined six witnesses including the victim, his mother, the medical officer and the police officers. The defence of the appellant was of total denial. He did not lead any evidence. According to him, he was falsely implicated on account of misunderstanding.

5. Learned Judge considered the evidence and the submissions. He then convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned earlier.

6. PW-1 is the mother of the victim. She had lodged the FIR. She has deposed that she had four children including the victim. The date of birth of the victim was 10.11.2011. In the year 2016, PW-1's husband was in the business of garments. Ahmad Bhaskar, Arbaz Zakhir Khan and the present appellant Sarfaraj were PW-1's husband's nephews. The appellant had started working with her husband in the factory since about four to five days before the incident. The appellant was residing in PW-1's husband's factory. On 15.2.2016 at about 4.30 p.m., her husband had taken the victim to the factory. The victim played there for quite some time. At about 7.30 p.m. her husband had gone away for purchasing the raw material and at that time had asked Arbaz to look after the victim. At about 8.30 p.m., Arbaz went out for bringing something and the victim was left with the appellant. At about 9.00 p.m., the appellant dropped the victim and his brother back to their house. The victim started crying. The victim told PW-1 that the appellant had committed wrong with him. He told her that the appellant had put his private parts in the mouth of the victim. The victim told her that the appellant should be punished. PW-1 then calle