Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Debangsu Basak, Bibhas Ranjan De, JJ.
Subha Dey And Another - Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal - Respondent
CRA 169 of 2020 With CRAN 5 of 2022
Decided On : 29-07-2022
POCSO - Sexual Offences - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 376(2)(j)/376D/506 and Protection of Children against Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Section 6
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were charged with sexually assaulting a minor victim. The victim alleged that the appellants forcibly committed rape upon her and threatened her not to disclose the incident. The prosecution presented evidence including witness testimonies and medical reports.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. The testimonies of the victim and other witnesses were inconsistent, and medical evidence did not support the allegations. The court noted that the victim's statement recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code did not corroborate the prosecution's case.
Issues: The key issue was whether the prosecution could establish the charges of sexual assault and criminal intimidation against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that a statement recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code is not substantive evidence and can only be used for corroboration. It also highlighted that when prosecution witnesses do not support the case and are not declared hostile, their evidence is binding on the prosecution.
Final Decision: The appellants were acquitted of all charges, and the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence were set aside. The appellants were directed to be set at liberty forthwith.
JUDGMENT
Debangsu Basak, J. - The appellants have assailed the judgement of conviction dated January 21, 2020 passed by the learned additional District and Sessions Judge, First Court and Special Court Bongaon, North 24 Parganas in Special (POCSO) 88/2018 (75/18) and the order of sentence dated January 20, 2020 passed therein.
2. By the impugned judgement of conviction dated January 21, 2020, the appellants have been held guilty of the offences under section 376 (2) (j)/376 D/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 6 of the Protection of Children against Sexual Offences Act, 2012. By the impugned order of sentence dated January 28, 2020, the appellants have been sentenced various terms with a maximum period of 10 years and directed to pay various amounts of fine and in default to undergo various periods of imprisonment.
3. The police received a complaint from the victim which was registered as a first information report being Gaighata police station case No. 1288/18 dated December 12, 2018 under section 376 (2) (j)/376D/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 6 of the Protection of Children against Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The police had investigated into the complaint and on completion of investigations, police submitted charge sheet against the appellants under section 376 (2) (j)/376D/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 6 of the Protection of Children against Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
4. The Trial Court had framed charges against the appellants under section 376 (2) (j)/376D/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 6 of the Protection of Children against Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The appellants had pleaded not guilty to the offence and on claiming to be tried were tried.
5. At the trial, the prosecution had examined 12 witnesses. The prosecution had tendered various documents as evidence which were marked as exhibits. The prosecution had also tendered material evidences which were marked as exhibits.
6. The prosecution had approached the Trial Court with the case that, the appellants had met the victim on December 11, 2018 when she had been to Bokchara Market for photography purpose. The appellants on the pretext of meeting her with her friend Furi took her to an open field near Digha, Bokchara in the night at about 10.30 P.M where the appellants had forcibly committed rape upon the victim. The appellant had threatened the victim not to disclose the incident to anybody. Consequently, the appellant had committed offences under Section 376 (2)(j)/376D/506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the Protection of Children against Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
7. Learned advocate appearing for the appellants has submitted that, the prosecution could not establish the case against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt. He has contended that, out of the 12 prosecution witnesses which were examined, three were declared hostile by the prosecution. The victim herself had been declared hostile by the prosecution.
8. Referring to the oral testimony of the victim, being the prosecution witness No. 7, learned advocate appearing for the appellants has submitted that, the victim stated that she was asked to establish a relationship with the appellants by making an ugly proposal and that, after hearing the same, she fled away from the place and returned home. He has contended that, the statement of the victim being prosecution witness No. 7 clearly indicated that no offence as alleged by the prosecution was committed. According to him, prosecution witness No. 7 is the only eyewitness and therefore, her evidence carries the utmost of weightage.
9. Learned advocate appearing for the appellants has submitted that, prosecution witness No. 1 and 2 being the mother and sister-in-law of the victim were also declared hostile by the prosecution. They did not support the case of the prosecution. They had stated that the prosecution witness No. 7 was detained by her friends for settling some disputes and thereafter prosecuti
The reliability of the victim's testimony, absence of medical evidence not being fatal, and the failure to conclusively establish an alibi defense were the main legal points established in the judgme....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of establishing charges beyond reasonable doubt in cases of sexual offences against minors, emphasizing the need for corroborati....
The judgment emphasizes the importance of evaluating witness demeanor and corroborating evidence in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt in cases of sexual assault against minors.
Rape – Conviction and sentence must be upheld where victim’s testimony is not only consistent but fairly detailed also.
Section 157 of Evidence Act makes it clear that a statement recorded under Section 164 CrPC can be relied upon for purpose of corroborating statements made by witnesses in committal court or even to ....
Sexual assault on girl child – If evidence of witness is cogent, consistent and unwavering she qualifies as a sterling witness upon whose evidence conviction of perpetrator can be based.
The importance of reliable and consistent evidence, the need for corroboration of the victim's testimony, and the requirement for scientific examination of evidence in cases of sexual assault.
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
