In sexual assault cases involving minors, the prosecution must provide consistent evidence and establish foundational facts; any reasonable doubt necessitates acquittal.

JUDGMENT :

Tirthankar Ghosh, J.

1.The present appeal has been preferred challenging the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 27.07.2022 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge Cum Special Judge under POCSO Act, 2012, Bishnupur, Bankura in POCSO Trial No. 04/2019 in connection with POCSO Case No. 02/2019 and arising out of Bishnupur P.S. Case No. 27/19, wherein the learned trial Court was pleased to convict the appellant under Section 8 of the POCSO Act and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs.40,000/- in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for three months.

2. Bishnupur Police Station Case No. 27/19 dated 22.01.2019 was registered for investigation under Section 354 /354A/506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 /12 of the POCSO Act. The aforesaid case was registered for investigation on the basis of information furnished by the mother of the victim girl ‘Y’. The allegations made in the written information addressed to the Officer-in-Charge of Bishnupur Police Station, Bankura were to the effect that the informant’s daughter, a student of Class (XI) of Bishnupur High School, aged about 16 years, was on her way for tuition at about 10.00 A.M. on 21.01.2019. While she was on her way, a neighbour namely Lalu Sk. stopped her near Bhatpukur Kalimandir and hurled obscene words, as also forcefully touched her body, including her private parts/ touched her breasts with ill-motive. Being afraid, the informant's daughter started crying, when the accused, being nervous fled away.

3. The informant alleged that her daughter was mentally disturbed as the accused had been threatening her family via third party to withdraw the complaint, and refrain her from taking any legal steps. Further, the health of the informant's daughter deteriorated consequently, there was some delay in submission of the complaint to the police authorities.

4. On the basis of the aforesaid complaint Bishnupur Police Station Case No. 27 of 2019 was registered and the investigating officer on completion of investigation submitted charge-sheet against the accused/appellant relying upon number of witnesses as also documents. The charge-sheet was submitted under Section 354 , 354A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of the POCSO Act against the accused-appellant.

5. On receipt of the charge-sheet, cognizance was taken by the learned Special Court, copies were supplied and consequently charges were framed under Section 8 /12 of the POCSO Act. The contents of the charges were read over to the accused person, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. The prosecution in order to prove its case relied upon twelve witnesses which included P.W.1-‘Y’, mother of the Victim Girl; P.W.2-‘X’, victim girl; P.W.3-‘Z’, father of the victim girl; P.W.4- Joydeep Sen, nephew of PW-1, PW-3 and cousin of PW-2; P.W.5- Suman Mondal, friend of PW-4; P.W.6 - Dr. T.K. Pal, Doctor who conducted medical examination of the accused; P.W.7 - Mujaffar Khan, a mason who noticed the accident having taken place; P.W.8- Anwar Ali Khan working as helper to PW-7; P.W.9- Sisir Patra, teacher of the victim girl and PW-4; P.W.10- Dr. Susanta Roy, Doctor who conducted medical examination of the victim girl; P.W.11- Sanjoy Majhi, ASI of Police, who prepared the formal FIR; P.W.-12 Barnali Sarkar, investigating officer of the case.

7. The prosecution in order to prove its case also relied upon certain documents which included the written complaint of ‘Y’, formal FIR, statement under Section 164 Cr.PC of the victim gir