IMPORTANT POINT
The judgment reinforces the evidentiary standards in sexual assault cases involving minors, highlighting the importance of witness credibility and medical corroboration.

JUDGMENT :

G. A. Sanap, J.

1. Heard finally with the consent of learned Advocates for the parties.

2. In this appeal, the challenge is to the judgment and order, dated 25.10.2021, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Akola, whereby the learned Judge, held the appellant/accused guilty for the offence punishable under Section 354(B) of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘the IPC’) and for the offence under Section 7 punishable under Section 8 and under Section 9 punishable under Section 10 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.10,000/- and in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month.

3. Background facts:

The victim involved, in this crime, is an unfortunate girl, who was three years old at the time of the incident. The wheels of the prosecution were put into motion on the report of her grandmother to the Murtizapur police station. It is stated that the incident occurred on 07.02.2019 at about 4:30 p.m. The informant is the grandmother of the victim. She, alongwith the victim and her grandson, went to the neighbour’s house. The victim and grandson were playing in an autorickshaw in front of her house. After some time, her grandson came to her and sat with her. She inquired about the victim girl. Her grandson told her that the victim had returned to the house. The informant went to the house and found that the victim was not there. Therefore, she went to search the victim. On the way, she met her brother-in-law, who at the time of the incident was nine years old and on inquiry, he told her that one boy from the locality took the victim with him. The informant took search of the victim. She noticed the victim coming out of the house of the said boy. The victim was crying. She consoled the victim and inquired with her about the cause of her annoyance. The victim narrated the incident to her. The informant went to the house of the accused. The informant saw that the accused was lying naked in his house. The name of the said boy, according to the informant, is Sameer Shah S/o. Salim Shah. The people gathered on the spot when the informant raised the shouts. The people caught hold of the accused and took him to the police station. The victim, thereafter, narrated the incident to her in detail. The informant went to the police station and lodged the report. On the same day, at about 9:35 p.m., on the basis of her report, the crime bearing No. 36 of 2019 was registered against the accused for the above offences.

4. PW-8- Sangeeta Gawade conducted the investigation into the crime. She recorded the statements of the witnesses. She drew the panchanama of the spot. During the course of the investigation, the clothes on the person of the victim were seized. The accused was arrested. The coconut oil bottle was seized from the spot. The victim was sent for medical examination. On completion of the investigation, she filed a chargesheet against the accused.

5. Learned Additional Sessions Judge framed the charge against the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. His defence is of a total denial. In order to bring home guilt against the accused, the prosecution examined eight witnesses. Learned Additional Sessions Judge on consideration of the evidence held the accused guilty and sentenced him, as above. The appellant is before this Court against his conviction and sentence.

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

7. Learned Advocate for the appellant submitted that except the evidence of the interested witnesses, there is no other independent evidence to prove the charge against the accused. Learned Advocate took me through the record and pointed out that neither the statement of the victim girl was recorded at the time of the investigation nor the victim girl has been examined as a witness