IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
RAMESH SINHA, C.J., RAJANI DUBEY, J.
Lacchan Panna @ Vijay Panna, S/o. Munshi Panna - Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through Police Station, Kotwali, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh - Respondent
CRA No. 250 of 2024
Decided On : 30-04-2024
POCSO Act - Conviction under Section 363, 366 & 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act - 374(2) of Cr.P.C. -
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the kidnapping and rape of a minor girl by the accused. The victim's father lodged an FIR stating that the accused had kidnapped and raped his daughter. The victim was recovered from a hospital in a critical condition, and medical examination confirmed sexual assault.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the accused guilty based on the victim's testimony, her father's statement, and documentary evidence. The court upheld the conviction, stating that the prosecution had proven the case beyond reasonable doubt.
Issues: The key issue was the age of the victim and the credibility of the victim's testimony as the sole evidence against the accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the principle that the testimony of the victim/prosecutrix can be the sole basis for conviction in cases of sexual assault, without the need for corroboration, if found trustworthy and credible.
Final Decision: The court upheld the conviction and sentenced the accused to rigorous imprisonment, dismissing the appeal and directing the accused to serve the sentence.
JUDGMENT :
Ramesh Sinha, C.J.
1. Heard Mr. Akhilesh Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. Pankaj Singh, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the respondent/State.
2. This criminal appeal is preferred under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ‘Cr.P.C.’) is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.10.2023, passed by the learned Fast Track Special Court, Raigarh (C.G.) in Special Trial No. 31 of 2019, by which the appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Section 363, 366 & 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, ‘POCSO Act’) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 03 years and fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine additional rigorous imprisonment for 02 month, sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 05 years and fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine additional rigorous imprisonment for 02 months, sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.5000/-, in default of payment of fine additional rigorous imprisonment for 06 months (all sentences will run concurrently).
3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that father (PW-3) of the victim lodged an FIR (Ex.P/6) on 14.08.2017 at around 21.20 stating that he has two childrens, one is son and another is his daughter/victim; his son is living along with his cousin brother and is studying and the victim is living along with him in village, whose date of birth is 03.06.2005. It is further stated that one month prior to the date of FIR, he had gone to his in-laws house and stayed there for 02 days, thereafter, he took a bus from village Kudekela for his village, at that time he met an unknown person, who was around 40-50 years old and asked his name and address and the unknown person told his name as Vijay Minj and told that he is resident of village Dharjiya, Bathan, near Pathalgaon and that he used to drive the vehicle of PDS Rice and transport, the PDS rice to the nearby societies. It is further stated that 15 days prior to the date of FIR, Vijay Minj came to the house of the father of the victim and at that time, victim and her father were alone at home. The father of the victim served food to Vijay Minj where he asked the victim’s father about his wife, then he told him that the mother of the victim passed away 5 to 6 years back, he felt sorry for that and asked him to get another women for marriage for victim’s father and stayed there for night and left on the second day. On 12.08.2021, at about 06:00 p.m. Vijay Minj again came to their house and told him that he convinced a women and told her about your daughter and that women wants to see your daughter. On the next morning, Vijay Minj had taken the victim’s father and victim along with him to the Ludek bus stand, from there they have taken the Vasudev bus and reached Raigarh at about 1:30 p.m. Thereafter, Vijay Minj asked the victim’s father to leave the victim in the waiting hall of the bus stand and they will take the vehicle from the employer of the Vijay Minj. Thereafter, he asked the victim’s father to wait by the road side because if the employer will see him then he will not give his vehicle to them. From there, Vijay Minj left the victim’s father and the father of the victim waited for Vijay Minj for half an hour, but when he was not returned, then the victim’s father became worried about the victim and he anxiously ran towards the bus stand waiting hall where he left her daughter, but when the victim’s father reached the bus stand waiting hall, her daughter was not present there and he searched for the victim all around, but did not find her. Thereafter, on suspecting that the man named Vijay Minj has kidnapped her daughter, he lodged the oral complaint before the Police Station City Kotwali, District Raigarh (C.G.) and on the basis of the complaint of the fathe
State of Maharashtra vs. Chandraprakash Kewalchand Jain
State of Punjab vs. Gurmit Singh
State of Orissa vs. Thakara Besra
State of H.P. vs. Raghubir Singh
Rameshwar vs. State of Rajasthan
Krishan Kumar Malik vs. State of Haryana
Rai Sandeep vs. State (NCT of Delhi)
State (NCT of Delhi) vs. Pankaj Chaudhary
Vishnu vs. State of Maharashtra
The main legal point established is that the testimony of the victim/prosecutrix can be the sole basis for conviction in cases of sexual assault, without the need for corroboration, if found trustwor....
The sole testimony of a victim in sexual assault cases can suffice for conviction if credible, without needing corroboration unless compelling reasons exist.
The reliability of the victim's testimony and the lack of requirement for corroboration in cases of sexual assault were central legal principles established in the judgment.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the testimony of the prosecutrix, if found to be trustworthy and reliable, requires no corroboration. The court may convict the accused on the....
The consent of a minor girl in case of sexual intercourse is immaterial and amounts to rape.
The testimony of a minor victim in sexual assault cases is sufficient for conviction without corroboration, as long as it is credible and inspires confidence.
The sole testimony of a victim in sexual assault cases can suffice for conviction if credible, without needing corroboration unless compelling reasons exist.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.