The court held that discrepancies in the victim's testimony and lack of corroborating evidence created reasonable doubt, leading to the appellant's acquittal.

JUDGMENT :

RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State as also perused the trial court record.

2. The present appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction dated 04.02.2023 and the order of sentence dated 20.02.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge POCSO Court cum Additional District and Session Judge VI, Gaya passed in POCSO Case No. 87 of 2020 (CIS No. 87 of 2020) arising out of Delha P.S. Case No. 170 of 2020.

3. By the impugned judgment, the appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 4 (2) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (in short ‘POCSO’) Act, 2012. The appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 22 years for the offence punishable under Section 4 (2) of the POCSO Act along with fine of Rs. 50,000/- and, in default of payment of fine, he was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for further six months. No sentence was awarded separately for the offence u/s 376 of the Indian Penal Code in view of Section 4 2 of the POCSO Act.

Prosecution Case

4. As per the prosecution case, the informant/victim states that on 31.07.2020 at around 9:00 A.M., Mohan Mishra @ Baba @ Pyara Mohan Mishra, aged about 55 years, came to her house and asked her to accompany him for worship at Shitla Mata Temple near Vishnupad. It is alleged that on earlier occasions also, with the consent of her mother, he had taken her to Mangla Gauri Temple under the pretext of improving her acumen through puja path. On the said day, from near Railway Gumti No. 1 under Kotwali Police Station, the accused repeatedly called her from his mobile No. **********, upon which she went there and both proceeded by a rickshaw to Shitla Mata Temple, which was found closed. Thereafter, on the pretext of purchasing clothes, he took her to Krishna Hotel but instead took her to a room on the upper floor where he forcibly committed rape upon her. Though she raised shouts, Gopal Prasad, the owner of Krishna Hotel present on the ground floor did not intervene. It is alleged that the appellant kept her confined there for about half an hour before leaving. The victim then returned home and narrated the incident to her parents and others following which her father took her to Krishna Hotel, where an altercation took place between her father and the hotel owner. She also stated that as her clothes were wet due to rain, she took a bath and washed the clothes thereafter.

5. On the basis of the aforesaid written application, Delha P.S. Case No. 170 of 2020 dated 31.07.2020 was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376 /34 of the IPC and under Section 4 , 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act.

6. After completion of investigation of the case, the Investigating Officer (the I.O) submitted charge-sheet being Charge-Sheet No. 221 of 2020 dated 04.09.2020 under Sections 376 /34 of the IPC and under Sections 4 of the POCSO Act.

7. The cognizance of the offences under Sections 376 /34 of the IPC and under Sections 4 /16 of the POCSO Act was taken against the appellant and charges were explained to the appellant in Hindi to which he pleaded not guilty. Accordingly, learned Trial Court framed the charges against him under /34 of the and under Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act.

8. The defence has examined six witnesses on behalf of the prosecution and exhibited some documentary evidences in course of trial. The description of witnesses and the exhibits ar