Back
BIBHAS RANJAN DE
Gopal Sardar – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Bibhas Ranjan De, J.
Preface:-
1. Challenge in this appeal is the judgement and order of conviction dated 01.02.2023 & 02.02.2023 respectively passed by the Ld. Judge in Sessions Trial Case No. 14(07) 2015 arising out of Sessions Case no. 32 (8) 14 and Special Case No. 82/15 wherein the accused/appellant was convicted under Section 354B of the Indian Penal Code (for short IPC) and Section 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short POCSO Act).
2. In view of the guidelines set by the Hon’ble Apex Court Governing this kind of scenarios, I will consciously avoid to divulge into the particulars of the survivor (for short X), witnesses and the Police Station, Hospital, other places including place of occurrence.
3. The appellant has been convicted by the Ld. Trial Judge as under:-
| Particulars of Accused/Appellant | |||
| Section | Sentence | Fine | Sentence in default of fine |
| 10 of POCSO Act | 7 years of rigorous imprisonment | Rs.25,000/- | Six months of rigorous imprisonment |
| 354B of the IPC | 5 years of rigorous imprisonment | Rs.10,000/- | Six months of simple imprisonment |
Background:-
4. The
The court emphasized that the testimony of a minor victim in sexual assault cases must be treated with sensitivity, and minor inconsistencies do not undermine the prosecution's case.
Point of Law - No legal compulsion to look for any other evidence to corroborate the evidence of prosecutrix before recording an order of conviction.
The consistent and corroborated testimony of witnesses, supported by medical evidence, is crucial in establishing guilt in sexual offence cases, and contradictory or inconsistent defenses can weaken ....
The necessity of corroborative evidence in sexual assault cases is critical, and the failure to provide medical evidence raises reasonable doubt, impacting the legality of convictions.
Statutorial presumption u/s 29 and 30 of POCSO Act certainly places a persuasive burden on appellant to show that he does not possess requisite culpable mental state for offence for which he is prose....
The prosecution's burden was not met due to substantial inconsistencies in witness testimonies; thus, a conviction was unjustified.
Point of Law – Kidnapping and abduction – Conviction - victim, who is found to be an unreliable witness - appellant is entitled for benefit of doubt
The competence of child witnesses, scrutiny of hostile witnesses' testimony, and the significance of corroborative evidence and the presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act are central legal pri....
The presumption of innocence in favor of the accused and the higher threshold required to rebut the presumption in case of acquittal.
The trial court erred in convicting under both IPC and POCSO Act without sufficient corroborative evidence, violating Section 42 of the POCSO Act regarding sentencing options.
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
