Back
JITENDRA KUMAR
Islam Miyan Hajam @ Islam Miyan S/o Kuresh Miyan @ Kuresh Miya – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
JITENDRA KUMAR, J.
1. The present appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 11.01.2023 and 18.01.2023 respectively passed by Ld. Additional District and Sessions Judge-VIIth-cum-Special Judge, POCSO Act, West Champaran at Bettiah in POCSO Case No. 201 of 2018, S.G.R. No. 62 of 2018, arising out of Balthar P.S. Case No. 66 of 2018, whereby the sole appellant has been found guilty of offence punishable under Section 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for ten years under Section 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code and R.I for 10 years under Section 4 of the POCSO Act. A fine of Rs. 20,000/- payable to the victim has also been imposed upon the Appellant. In case of default to pay the fine, the convict has been ordered to undergo additional S.I. of three months. Ld. Trial Court has also directed the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Bettiah, West Champaran to pay Rs. 3,00,000/- to the victim towards compensation.
2. The F.I.R. bearing Balthar P.S. Case No. 66 of 2018 has been registered on written report of the victim/informant dated 28.05.2018 addressed to O
The prosecution must prove foundational facts, including the victim's age, beyond reasonable doubt, even under statutory presumptions of the POCSO Act.
The prosecution must prove foundational facts of age and sexual assault beyond reasonable doubt, even with statutory presumptions under the POCSO Act.
The prosecution must prove foundational facts, including the victim's age and the occurrence of the alleged crime, beyond reasonable doubt for a conviction under the POCSO Act.
The prosecution must prove the victim's age as below 18 for POCSO applicability; failure to do so leads to acquittal.
The court ruled that the prosecution failed to prove the victim's age as below 18 years, thus the POCSO Act was not applicable, leading to a modification of the conviction under IPC.
The court held that discrepancies in the victim's testimony and lack of corroborating evidence created reasonable doubt, leading to the appellant's acquittal.
The victim's testimony, if found reliable, can form the sole basis for conviction under the POCSO Act, and legal presumption against the accused places the burden of rebuttal on the defense.
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
