Back
B. BHATTACHARJEE
Arjun Boro son of Late Krishna Boro – Appellant
Versus
State of Meghalaya represented by the Commissioner – Respondent
JUDGMENT AND ORDER
This Criminal appeal under Section 374 (2) Cr.P.C is filed against the Judgment and order of conviction dated 18-05-2022 and sentence of even date passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO)/ Addl D.C(J), East Jaintia Hills District, Khliehriat in POCSO Case No. 8/2020 (new), [Spl Session No.18/19 (old)] whereby the accused/appellant was convicted under Section 3(a)/4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) and awarded a sentence of 7 (seven) years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand rupees) only and in default to undergo one month’s simple imprisonment.
The fact of the case is that on 19-08-2018 a written FIR was lodged by the complainant to the effect that on the midnight of 17-08- 2018, her son, aged about 10 years, was sexually assaulted by the accused/appellant who came to stay in her house as he was well known to her husband. The FIR was received vide GDE No. 24 dated 19-08-2018 at Ladrymbai Police Outpost. Thereafter the FIR was received at Khliehriat PS vide GDE No. 05 dated 19-08-2018 and a cognizable case was registered vide Khliehriat PS Case No. 153(8)2018 under Section 377 IPC read with Se
(1) Presumption of guilt – Court cannot mechanically accept whatever prosecution version of case is and give an approval to it without even analyzing admissibility and acceptability of evidence relie....
The judgment establishes that convictions under POCSO require substantive evidence, and reliance on inadmissible statements can lead to acquittal.
The court upheld the conviction for sexual assault establishing that medical evidence corroborated the survivor's account despite contradictions from other witnesses, emphasizing the need to protect ....
It is a settled law that victim of a sexual assault is not treated as accomplish and as such her evidence does not require corroboration from any other evidence if her sole testimony inspires confide....
The statement of a deceased victim recorded under Section 164 CrPC is not substantive evidence and cannot solely support a conviction; the prosecution must prove the victim's age and provide corrobor....
The court established that the survivor's conduct and the inconsistencies in her testimony raised reasonable doubt about the prosecution's case, necessitating acquittal.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
