The court upheld the conviction for rape of a minor based on credible testimony and corroborative evidence, emphasizing the admissibility of school records for age determination.

JUDGMENT ON BOARD :

Arvind Kumar Verma, J.

This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.11.2021 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO/FTC) Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj in Special Sessions Trial POCSO) No. 18/2019 whereby and whereunder the appellant has been held guilty for commission of the offence under Section and sentenced as described below :

2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that a written report was made by the mother (PW-2) of the victim/prosecutrix at police Station Balrampur alleging that on the information given by Pankaj, she asked her daughter-victim (PW-1) who state that on 14.03.2019 at about 5.00 a.m. she was watching the Baraat along with her sister Shanti and aunt Poonam at that point of time, appellant Ajay came to her and allured her and took her towards the Jhapra School and after pressing her mouth, threatened to kill her and thereafter forcefully committed rape on her. It is alleged that out of fear, she did not disclose about the incident. On the basis of the above information, Crime No. 48/2019 under Section 376, 506 IPC and Section 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act were registered. During Investigation, Spot map Ex.P-3 was prepared. Victim was medically examined and the medical report is Ex.P-19. Memo Ex.P-14 was prepared and summoned the Headmaster for providing the school admission and discharge register and the same was seized. Statement of the victim girl as well as other witnesses were also recorded. The police arrested the accused/appellant and after completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against the appellant in the Court of Sessions Judge, Balrampur at Ramanujganj and thereafter committed the case to the Additional Sessions Judge, Ramanujgaj for trial and hearing and disposal in accordance with law.

3. In order to establish the charge against the appellant, the prosecution has examined 10 witnesses. Statement of the appellant was also recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in which he denied the charge levelled against him and stated that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. This apart, one defence witness has been examined.

4. After appreciation of evidence available on record, learned trial Court has convicted the appellant and sentenced him as mentioned in paragraph-1 of this appeal. Hence this appeal by the appellant.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the prosecution has failed to prove the case against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. There is no legally admissible evidence with regard to the age of the prosecutrix that on the date of incident she was minor and that the case of prosecution rests only on the evidence of interested witnesses. It is further submitted that in absence of examination of author of the School Admission and Discharge Register, the same cannot be taken into consideration to determine the age of the prosecutrix and the School Admission and Discharge Register is a weak type of evidence. There is no ossification report of the prosecutrix to determine her actual age on the date of incident. He further submits that except victim there is no credible evidence in support of her statement even deposition of her mother is based on information given by victim and medical evidence also does not corroborate, therefore, only on the basis of deposition of victim holding guilty to the appellant by the learned trial Court is not sustainable and the alleged offence of the IPC and the POCSO Act are not made out against