IMPORTANT POINT
In sexual assault cases, the victim's testimony must be credible and corroborated by reliable evidence to support a conviction.

JUDGMENT :

1. In this appeal, the challenge is to the judgment and order, dated 13.11.2021, passed by the learned District Judge-2 and Special Judge (POCSO Act), Wardha (for short ‘Special Judge’), whereby the learned Special Judge, held the appellant/ accused guilty of the offences punishable under Section 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘the IPC’) and under Section 4 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short ‘the POCSO Act’) and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.7,000/-and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for one year.

2. Background facts:

The crime was registered on the report of the victim (PW-1) dated 08.01.2016. The prosecution’s case, which can be gathered from the report and material on record, is that on the date of the incident the victim was 17 years old. She was residing with her parents at village Deoli, Tal. Deoli, Distt. Wardha. The appellant/accused is a resident of the same village. It is the case of the prosecution that on 08.01.2016, at about 8:30 p.m., the victim was returning to her house from her grandfather’s house. At that time, the accused, who is the neighbour of the victim, caught hold the victim in front of the Zilla Parishad Primary School. He pulled her aside. The victim tried to push him. In this scuffle, her clothes were torn. The accused dragged her towards the Zilla Parishad School. She shouted for help. However, the accused told her that nobody would come to her help. The accused removed her salwar and knickers and pushed her down. The accused removed his pant and underwear. It is stated that the accused inserted his finger in her vagina. The accused slept on her. In this process, his semen was discharged on her thighs. The maternal brother of the victim heard her shouts and came to the spot. He slapped the accused. The accused fled from the spot. The victim went to her house and narrated the incident to her mother. Thereafter, the victim with other family members went to Deoli Police Station and lodged the report. The crime bearing No. 24 of 2016 was registered against the accused.

3. PW-10 carried out the investigation. He drew the spot panchanama. He forwarded the victim for a medical examination. The accused was arrested on the next day. The clothes of the victim and the accused were seized. The clothes of the accused were forwarded for medical examination. The blood and other samples were collected. The samples were sent to FSL, Nagpur for analysis. The investigating officer collected the documentary evidence with regard to the birth date of the victim. On completion of the investigation, the investigating officer filed the charge-sheet.

4. Learned Special Judge framed the charge against the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. His defence is of a false implication on account of his enmity with the family of the victim. The prosecution, in order to prove the charge against the accused, has examined 11 witnesses. Learned Judge on consideration of the evidence, held the accused guilty of the charge and sentenced him, as above. The appellant is before this Court against his conviction and sentence.

5. I have heard the learned Advocate for the appellant and the learned APP for the State. Perused the record and proceedings.

6. Learned Advocate for the appellant submitted that the DNA report has not been properly appreciated by the learned Judge. Learned Advocate submitted that the DNA report does not establish the complicity of the accused in the crime. Learned Advocate further submitted that the evidence of the victim is not reliable. Learned Advocate submitted that if the accused wanted to commit sexual intercourse with the victim then he would not have spared the victim. Learned Advocate submitted that the medical evidence as well as the report of the analysis of the sample do not show that semen was detected either on the clothes of the victim or th