IMPORTANT POINT
The judgment underscores the necessity of credible evidence and the adverse impact of delays in reporting sexual offences on the prosecution's case.

JUDGMENT :

G. A. Sanap, J.

1. In this appeal, challenge is to the judgment and order dated 27.02.2020, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Gadchiroli, whereby the learned Judge held the accused guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 448 and 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “IPC”) and under Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, “POCSO Act”). He has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default to suffer simple imprisonment for ten days for the offence punishable under Section 448 of the IPC; rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- and in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(i) of the IPC. The accused, though convicted for the offence punishable under Section 4 of the POCSO Act, no separate sentence has been awarded.

2. BACKGROUND FACTS:

The First Information Report (FIR) in this case was registered on the report of respondent No.2 (hereinafter referred to as the “victim”). The victim and the accused are the residents of Palasgad, Tah. Kurkheda, Dist. Gadchiroli. It is stated that, on 28th October, 2017, the mother of the victim (PW-2) had gone to the field. Her maternal uncle, Roshan Modarkar (PW-3), had come to their house. He had also gone to the field. The victim was alone at her house. It is stated that at 1:00 p.m., the victim was inside the house. The doors of the house were closed. The accused knocked on the door of the house. The victim opened the door and saw the accused. The accused, after opening the door by the victim, entered into the house and closed the door from inside. It is stated that the accused caught hold the hand of the victim. She raised a shout. The accused crammed the Odhani in her mouth. The accused tied her hands with Odhani. The victim, therefore, could not resist. The accused thereafter removed her cloths as well as his cloths. The accused thereafter committed forcible sexual intercourse with the victim. It is alleged that, after some time, her maternal uncle Roshan came from the field. He knocked on the front door of the house. The hands of the victim were tied, and therefore, she could not open the door. The maternal uncle went to the backside and knocked on the backside door. The accused, in the meantime, untied the hands of the victim. The victim opened the door of the house. The maternal uncle entered into the house. The accused, taking advantage of the situation, ran away from the backside door. She thereafter narrated the incident to her maternal uncle. She also narrated the incident to her mother when she came back from the field after being informed about the incident by her maternal uncle. On the next day, i.e., on 29th October, 2017 at about 2:15 hrs., they went to Purada Police Station and lodged the report. On the basis of this report, a Crime bearing No.34/2017 was registered against the accused.

3. Police Sub-Inspector Sukhdev Prakash Gode (PW-9) carried out the investigation. The victim was sent to the Government Hospital for medical examination. PW-9 arrested the accused. The accused was sent for medical examination. PW-9 went to the spot and drew the spot panchanama. The cloths of the accused, the cloths of the victim and other articles were seized under panchanama.

4. After completion of the investigation, the investigation revealed the involvement of the accused in the crime and therefore the charge-sheet was filed against him. The learned Judge framed the charge against the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty. His defence is of false implication on account of a dispute with the family members of the victim. The prosecution, in order to bring home the guilt against the accused, examined 9 witnesses. The accused has examined 3 witnesses in his defence. The learned Judge, on the analysis of the evidence, held the accused guilty and se