GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Mridul Kumar Kalita, J.
Promud Yadav – Petitioner
Versus
State of Assam and Anr. – Respondents
Crl.A. 303 of 2023
Decided on 1.4.2025
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – Sections 8 and 10 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 448 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 374(2) – House trespass and rape of girl child – Conviction and sentence – In offences of such nature, normally except victim, there is always unlikelihood of availability of other eye-witnesses to such incidents – There is no bar for Court to arrive at conclusion of guilt of accused on the basis of uncorroborated testimony of prosecutrix if she is found to be trustworthy and her evidence is of sterling quality – However, in instant case, if a minor girl of 8 years old is subjected to forceful penetrative sexual assault, there would certainly be some injuries on her private part and her hymen is unlikely to remain intact – Once testimony of victim girl was not found to be of sterling quality, same may not be utilized, without corroboration, for the purpose of convicting appellant for a lesser offence – Victim is also a child witness and possibility of tutoring her may not be excluded – Conviction of appellant under Section 10 of POCSO Act, 2012, based on sole testimony of victim girl is not sustainable in law – Conviction and sentence set aside giving benefit of doubt to appellant. (Paras 37, 38, 39, 41, 47 and 48)
Result: Criminal Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT (CAV)
Heard Mr. S. Nawaz, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. R.R. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam as well as Mr. D. Gogoi, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the respondent No. 2/informant.
2. This Criminal Appeal has been filed, under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the appellant, Promud Yadav, impugning the judgment and order dated 14.06.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Karbi Anglong, Diphu in the POCSO Case No. 08/2022 whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 10 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for two months.
3. The facts relevant for consideration of the instant appeal, in brief, are as follows:-
i. That on 08.11.2021, the father of the victim girl had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-charge of Bokajan Police Station, inter alia, alleging that on 07.11.2021 at about 8:00 PM, his elder daughter who was aged about seven years at the time of alleged incident informed him that on 06.11.2021 at about 11:00 PM when they were sleeping, the appellant took her away gagging her mouth and committed rape on her thereafter he threatened her not to disclose the matter to anyone else.
ii. On receipt of the said FIR, Bokajan P.S. Case No. 205/2021 was registered under Section 448 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and investigation was initiated. After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was laid against the appellant under Section 448 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 8 of POCSO Act, 2012.
iii. During the course of investigation, the appellant was arrested and he faced the trial remaining in custody. The Trial Court after considering the materials available on record and after hearing the learned counsel for both the sides, framed charges under Section 448 of the IPC and Section 4 of POCSO Act, 2012 against the appellant. When the said charges were read over and explained to the appellant, he pleaded his innocence and claimed to be tried.
iv. To bring home the charges against the appellant, the prosecution side examined as many as 8 (eight) prosecution witnesses including the informant as well as the victim girl. During his examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the appellant denied the truthfulness of the testimony of the prosecution witnesses. He also adduced two defence evidences in his defence. However, ultimately on culmination of the trial, the appellant was convicted and sentenced, by the impugned judgment, in the manner as already described in paragraph No. 2 hereinabove.
4. Before considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the sides, let us go through the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, which is available on record.
5. The PW-1, who is the victim girl herself, has deposed that on the date of deposing before the Trial Court she was aged about 9 years and she was reading in Class-IV. Before recording her testimony, the Trial Court put her some general questions to ascertain her capacity to understand and give rational answers to the questions posed to her and after satisfying with her capacity, the Trial Court recorded her testimony. She has deposed that she knows the appellant and the incident took place on the next day of Diwali and at that time she was eight years old. She has deposed that the incident occurred at night and she came out of her house to attend the call of nature. At that time, her father and younger sister were sleeping inside the house. She has deposed that the appellant suddenly came and gagged her mouth and took her to Verandah to the backside of their house. There was a bed at the Verandah. She deposed that the appellant laid her on the bed and after removing her clothes, pushed his penis into her vagina and raped her for about one hour
Girl child – Once testimony of victim girl is not found to be of sterling quality, same may not be utilized, without corroboration, for the purpose of convicting appellant for a lesser offence.
The conviction under the POCSO Act was overturned due to the victim's unreliable testimony and lack of corroborative medical evidence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the critical appreciation of the victim's testimony in a sexual assault case, the burden of proof on the accused to establish the absence of culpab....
The testimony of the victim in sexual assault cases must be credible and reliable; delays and contradictions can undermine a prosecution's case, leading to acquittal.
The court upheld the conviction for aggravated penetrative sexual assault based on the victim's credible testimony, emphasizing that minor discrepancies do not undermine the overall reliability of he....
The presumption of guilt under Section 29 of the POCSO Act is not absolute and requires the prosecution to establish foundational facts before the burden shifts to the accused to rebut the presumptio....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.