IMPORTANT POINT
For offences punishable under Section 376 of IPC and Section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, evidence of victim itself is sufficient – It does not need corroboration of testimony.

JUDGMENT

Aggrieved by the Judgment dated 05.02.2020 passed by the learned I Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge for trial of Cases under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Hyderabad in S.C.P.C.S.No.30 of 2019, the present Criminal Appeal is filed.

2. Heard Sri Apurva M Gokhale, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant as well as Smt. Shalini Sakena, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent.

3. The trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellant/accused for the offence punishable under Sections 354- A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘the IPC’) and Section 9(m) read with Section 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short ‘the POCSO Act’) and he was imposed seven years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of fine amount, he has to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three (3) months for the offence punishable under Section 506 of IPC.

4. Aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, the present appeal is preferred by the appellant stating that the Judgment of the learned Sessions Judge is contrary to the evidence on record and the learned Sessions Judge erred in convicting the appellant under Section 9(m) read with Section 10 of the POCSO Act even though there are several discrepancies in the statement of the witnesses. The learned Sessions Judge erred relying upon the evidence of the victim where it is evident that the witness/P.W.1 has been tutored which is evident from her admission and demeanour. The opinion of the doctor is also not conclusive to state that there is possibility of sexual assault, as such, the same cannot be read against the accused. The case of the prosecution itself was highly improbable. Therefore, prayed the Court to set aside the judgment.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the evidence on record is not sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused. The scene of offence itself is not proper and there is delay of registering the case and P.W.3 is the interested witness. The statement of the victim was recorded after arrest of the accused, and thereafter, registered the case which is against the settled principles of law. There are several contradictions in the evidence of the victim and she was examined two (2) months after the incident. Therefore, there are several lapses in prosecution case. As such, he prayed the Court to set aside the impugned judgment and acquit the appellant by allowing the appeal.

6. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the prosecution proved the evidence beyond the reasonable doubt. The offence alleged is heinous in nature and victim is of 5 ½ years old girl and the statement of the victim is recorded after two (2) months of the incident and therefore, minor discrepancies cannot be taken into consideration in these type of cases. The evidence on record is sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused. Therefore, there are no infirmities in the judgment passed by the trial Court and there are no merits in the appeal and the same is liable to be dismissed.

7. The facts of the case are that on 02.04.2018 at about 6:15PM., P.W.1 lodged a complaint to the police stating that she is having a son aged about 10 years and a daughter, who is the victim, aged about 5 ½ years studying first class and in their opposite house, one person by name Ashok/accused is staying since 10 years with his wife Asmitha, who is a teacher and that her daughter/PW2 is going to tuition since three (3) years prior to the incident and on 02.04.2018 at about 02:00 P.M., when her daughter went to a shop near their house, the said Ashok/accused called her daughter on the pretext of providing her food and took her into his bed room and made her to sit on his thighs, removed her underwear and touched her private parts with his right hand index finger and rubbed for two minutes. Due to whic