Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH and GUNNU ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY, JJ.
Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 212 of 2022
(10.11.2023)
Indrajeet Paswan @ Indrajeet Rai @ Indrajeet Kumar ... Appellant
vs.
State of Bihar ... Respondent
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 376, 363, 365 & 506 – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – Section 4 – Rape – Minor – Acquittal – Parents of the victim not preferred any report/written application to the police when the commission of offence of rape was committed against the victim – Statement of victim clearly disclose that the appellant had love-affair with the victim and they had physical relationship and even the appellant intends to marry her once she attains the age of 18 years – Victim voluntarily ran away from the house and that the appellant has never kidnapped her and further the victim was caught hold by the police – Medical evidence also do not support the case of the prosecution – No external injuries were found on the victim girl and pregnancy test was negative there are no signs of any internal injuries or a foreign bodies and the victim was sexually active – Hymen of the victim was old-ruptured and there are many reasons for hymen rupture and the allegation of rape is not proved as per the medical evidence – Evidence of the victim not trustworthy and reliable as her statement before the Magistrate is completely contradicting with that of her testimony – No reasons have been assigned as to why there was no complaint registered against the appellant when the alleged incident of rape took place – Age of the victim was also not determined by the Trial Court so as to prove that she is aged below 18 years so as to attract the provisions under POCSO Act – Impugned judgment and order of sentence set aside – Appeal allowed – Appellant acquitted. (Paras 24, 27, 28 & 29)
Gunnu Anupama Chakravarthy, J. – This criminal appeal has been preferred against Judgment of conviction dated 14.02.2022 and order of sentence dated 16.02.2022 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge VI – cum – Special Judge POCSO, Jehanabad, in POCSO Case No. 24 of 2020 (arising out of Barabar Paryatan P.S. Case No. 41 of 2020. By the judgment and order aforesaid, the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under: –
|
| Convicted under Sections |
| Sentence |
|
|
|
| Imprisonment | Fine (Rs.) | In default of fine |
| Indrajeet Paswan | 376 of the IPC | R.I. for Life | 10,000/- | R.I. for one year |
| @ Indrajeet Rai @ | 4 of the POCSO Act | R.I. for Life | 10,000/- | R.I. for one year |
| Indrajeet Kumar | 363 of the IPC | R.I. for Life | 10,000/- | R.I. for one year |
|
| 365 of the IPC | R.I. for Life | 10,000/- | R.I. for one year |
|
| 506 of the IPC | R.I. for Life | 5,000/- | R.I. for one year |
All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.
2. As the matter relates to Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 of the POCSO Act, we are of the considered view that the names of the victim or the parents of the victim shall not be disclosed in the judgment in order to safeguard the identity of the victim girl as per the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
3. We have heard Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Manish Kumar No. 2, learned APP for the State.
4. The criminal case was set into motion basing on the written information dated 10.06.2020 given by the father of the victim, who is the informant (P.W.-9), to the Director General of Police, Patna, for which an F.I.R. was registered as Barabar Paryatan P.S. Case No. 41 of 2020.
5. The brief contents culled out of the written application are that the minor daughter of the informant has been eloped from the window of the semi-furnished house by the appellant, who happens to be the tuition teacher for his children. On 7.5.2020, the appellant was hiding himself near the bathroom. The victim went out for natural call at around 12.00 in the midnight. The appellant covered her mouth with a cloth, took her to the corridor, continued to rape her and also threatened her to kill. The wife of the informant woke up at 3.00 A.M. for attending a natural call and started shouting on seeing the victim in half naked condition. On hearing the noise, the informant got up and the people nearby also woke up, came to the place of occurrence saw the appellant. Further, the informant hit the appellant 2-4 blows and in the meantime the appellant escaped jumping over the semi constructed wall, but the shirt, slipper and mobile of the appellant were left in the corridor. Later the appellant called the informant and threatened him that he would kill the family members in the event of informing the said incident to the police and that due to fear he did not inform about the incident to any one. Further, the contents of the written application disclose that on 08.06.2020, the appellant eloped the victim girl and she was traceless. The appellant as a teacher used to teach the victim in the 9th and 10th standard and that the appellant has been sexually exploiting her and threatened to kill her in the event of revealing the facts to others. Therefore, they prayed to take an action against the appellant.
6. Basing on the report / written application, the SHO, Barabar Paryatan Police Station registered the case, against the appellant vide FIR bearing Case No. 41 of 2020 dated 10.06.2020 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 363, 365, 376 and 506 of the IPC and under Section 4 of the POCSO Act.
7. During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer has recorded the statement of witnesses under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C., and also got examined the victim under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C.. Further the victim was refused to medical examina
The judgment underscores the necessity of corroborative evidence in sexual assault cases, the importance of establishing the victim's age under the POCSO Act, and the need for reliable witness testim....
The court held that the uncorroborated testimony of a minor victim in a sexual assault case can sustain a conviction, provided it is credible.
The prosecution failed to prove the victim's age and the occurrence of the alleged incident beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the appellant's acquittal.
The prosecution must conclusively establish the victim's age under the POCSO Act, and inconsistencies in the victim's testimony can undermine the case against the accused, warranting acquittal.
The conviction under the POCSO Act requires substantial evidence beyond mere suspicion; failure to prove such evidence necessitates acquittal.
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....
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
