IMPORTANT POINT
The prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, and any doubt must be resolved in favor of the accused.

JUDGMENT :

In this appeal, challenge is to the judgment and order dated 11.05.2022, passed by the learned Special Judge & Additional Sessions Judge-2, Amravati, whereby the learned Judge convicted the appellant for the offences punishable under Section 376-AB of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “IPC”) and under Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, “POCSO Act”), and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for twenty years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. No separate sentence has been awarded for the proved offence punishable under Section 376-AB of the IPC.

02] BACKGROUND FACTS:

PW-2 (informant) is the mother of the victim girl (PW-1). The crime was registered against the appellant on the report of PW-2. The case of prosecution against the appellant, which can be gathered from the report and other materials compiled in the charge-sheet, is that, on the date of the incident, the victim was 9 years old and studying in 3rd Standard. The informant has three daughters. The informant and her husband are doing labour work on the field. On 25th November, 2020, the informant, her husband, and her elder daughter had gone for work.

The victim and younger daughter were at home. The informant came back from the field at about 4:00 p.m. It is stated that the victim told her that she had gone to play with her friend Sonakshi at her house. Sonakshi is the daughter of the appellant. The appellant was at home. The appellant called her in the kitchen and removed her knickers. The appellant rolled over his hand on her private part and inserted his finger into her vagina. The victim came back to her house. The informant and her family belong to the Buddhist community. The informant was mentally disturbed after hearing the incident, and therefore, immediately they did not go to the police station.

03] On 27th November, 2020, the informant, her husband, and the victim went to the police station. The informant narrated the incident to the police. The Police Officer (PW-4) Kavita Patil recorded her oral report. On the basis of this report, a Crime bearing No.308/2020 was registered against the appellant. The victim was sent for medical examination. The doctor (PW-5) examined the victim and issued the medical certificate. PW-4 carried out the initial investigation. She drew the spot panchanama. The statement of the victim was recorded. Similarly, the victim was sent to the Magistrate for recording her statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, “Cr.PC”). Further investigation was carried out by PW-6 Sohail Shaikh. He collected the birth certificate and caste certificate of the victim. On completion of the investigation, he filed the charge-sheet against the accused in the Court of law.

04] The learned Special Judge framed the charge against the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty. His defence is of false implication on account of the enmity between him and the father of the victim. The prosecution, in order to prove the charge against the accused, examined six witnesses. The learned Judge, on consideration of the evidence, found the said evidence sufficient to prove the charge against the accused and accordingly convicted and sentenced the accused as above. The appellant, being aggrieved by the judgment and order, has come before this Court in appeal.

05] I have heard Mr. Mohd. Ateeque, learned advocate for the appellant/accused, Mrs. S.V. Kolhe, learned APP for respondent No.1/State, and Ms. Falguni Badami, learned advocate for respondent No.2. Perused the record and proceedings.

06] Learned advocate for the appellant/accused submitted that there was two days delay in lodging the report of the incident. The delay has not been satisfactorily explained. The facts stated in the report as well as in the cross-examination by the info