The importance of the victim's evidence, the inhumane mindset of the abuser, and the need for corroboration in cases of child sexual abuse.

JUDGMENT

Bibek Chaudhuri, J. - The accused suffered conviction and sentence in Special T.R Case No.28 of 2006 under Section 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences act (hereinafter POCSO act for short). The learned trial judge passed the order of sentence of imprisonment for six years and fine of Rs.20,000/-, in default of payment of fine, further imprisonment for five months.

2. The said judgment and order of conviction and sentence is assailed in the instant appeal. On 24th September, 2015 at about 10.20 pm at night, one Pradip Das lodged a complaint stating, inter alia, that his minor daughter aged about 11 years was a student of class-VI of a local school. She used to take tuition with other students from Tarak Das who used to reside at Das Para near Shani Temple. On 24th September, 2015 at about 10 am in the morning his daughter went to her private tutor to attend tuition class. at about 12 noon, the wife of the defacto complainant went to the house of the accused to bring her back, she found her sobbing and terrorized. On being asked, the daughter of the defacto complainant initially did not state anything. On repeated persuasion, at about 4 pm she informed that on that very date four girls went to take tuition to the accused. after imparting tuition for a while, the accused/teacher told other three girls to go home and asked the daughter of the defacto complainant to stay with him on the pretext that he would teach mathematics to her. Suddenly the accused embraced her daughter from behind, removed the cloth from her chest and kept on pressing her recently developed immature breasts and went on telling, 'are you feeling anything, did you have your period'. The victim cried out loudly and he left her after threatening her not to inform about the incident to anyone. The mother of the victim informed the matter to the defacto complainant who was working at the relevant point of time at Belgachia. Hearing such incident he returned to home and then went to the house of the accused and made a complaint against the accused to his mother Durga Das. But she misbehaved with the defacto complainant and helped her son to flee away. Then he lodged a written complaint in the local Police Station.

3. On the basis of the said complaint Domjur P.S Case No.927 dated 24th September, 2015 under Sections 354/506/109 of the IPC and 10/12 of the POCSO act was registered against the accused.

4. Investigation of the case ended in filing charge-sheet against the appellant under Section 10 of the POCSO act.

5. Learned trial judge on careful consideration of the evidence on record convicted the accused under Section 10 of the POCSO act and sentenced him accordingly.

6. It is submitted by Mr. Manjit Singh, learned advocate for the appellant that the facts and circumstances of the instant case clearly shows that the appellant was a victim of circumstance. It is alleged by the defacto complainant in his written complaint that the appellant partially disrobed the victim and pressed her immature breasts. It is on record that the appellant used to stay in his house with his mother, wife and one child at the relevant point of time. Mr. Singh has raised the question as to whether it is possible for a person to disrobe a girl aged about 11 years in his house where his wife and mother and a child also used to reside with the appellant. The defacto complainant stated in his written complaint that at the time of the alleged incident the victim reportedly cried out loudly. Surprisingly enough, no other inmate of the same house heard her cry when she was allegedly abused by the appellant.

7. Mr. Singh next submits that in a case sexual abuse, the evidence of the victim girl is of much importance. If the court is of the opinion that the evidence of the victim is believable, trustworthy and unblemished, an accused can be convicted on the basis of sole testimony of the victim. It is also an established principle of law that the victim's evidence cannot be eq