Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Manish Paswan Son Of Pyare Paswan – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeal against conviction under pocso act (Para 3 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. trial court's assessment of evidence and victim's age (Para 9 , 10 , 18) |
| 3. appellant's defense regarding discrepancies and fir delay (Para 12 , 14 , 19 , 21) |
| 4. court's critical analysis of evidence and witness credibility (Para 22 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 5. appellant acquitted due to lack of evidence (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
JUDGMENT :
RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. We had issued notice to the informant/victim which has been validly served upon her and she has entered appearance through her advocate but no one has appeared on her behalf to oppose the present appeal.
3. This appeal has been preferred for setting aside the judgment of conviction dated 04.11.2022 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the impugned judgment’) and the order of sentence dated 07.11.2022 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the impugned order’) passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge -cum- Special Judge (POCSO Act), Jamui (hereinafter called ‘the learned trial court’) in POCSO Case No. 37 of 2020 (arising out of Barhat P.S. Case No. 85/2020).
4. By the im
The conviction of the appellant was quashed due to insufficient and inconsistent evidence, demonstrating the necessity for reliable testimonies in criminal cases, especially under sexual offence laws....
The court emphasized that significant inconsistencies in victim statements, delay in FIR, and lack of corroborative evidence led to the acquittal of the appellant in a sexual assault case.
Prosecution has to prove the foundational facts of the offence charged against the accused, not based on proof beyond reasonable doubt, but on the basis of preponderance of probability.
The prosecution must prove foundational facts beyond reasonable doubt; reliance solely on the victim's testimony is insufficient if unsupported by corroborative evidence.
Conviction for sexual assault on a minor can rely on the sole testimony of the victim, established as credible, despite minor discrepancies in narrative and delays in reporting.
The testimony of a minor victim in sexual assault cases is sufficient for conviction if it inspires confidence, without the need for corroboration.
(1) Penetrative sexual assault on girl child – Evidence of approximate age of victim would not be sufficient to any conclusion about exact age of victim.(2) Medical examination of accused of rape is ....
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
