IMPORTANT POINT
Legally admissible evidence is crucial for establishing the age of a minor in cases under the POCSO Act. The court emphasized the need for concrete evidence to prove the age and consent of the victim.

JUDGMENT :

Rajani Dubey, J.

1. The appeal arise out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 02.11.2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/First Fast Track Special Court (under POCSO Act), Bastar at Jagdalpur (C.G.), in Special Sessions Trial No.30/2019 whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under :-

2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that appellant Suresh Kunjam had been establishing physical relation with victim for last one year on the pretext of marriage and due to the said relation, victim conceived. The victim repeatedly asked the appellant to get married and many times she made call to the appellant through mobile of her friend but the appellant was evasive. The victim did not disclosed about her pregnancy to anyone. On 02.05.2019, the victim suddenly developed abdominal pain and delivered premature dead child. The relatives of the victim buried the dead child with social custom. After two days of delivery, due to sudden abdominal pain and vomiting of blood, the victim was admitted to Hospital at Dabhra from where she was referred to Medical College, Dimrapal. and on 04.05.2019 she left for heavenly abode during the course of treatment. After merg inquiry, Crime No.0/19 under Section 376(A) of IPC and Section 06 of POCSO Act was registered at Police Station Pakhnar. Based on the merg inquiry, an FIR No.22/19 was registered at Police Station – Darbha. Dead body of deceased was sent for postmortem examination to the Medical College, Jagdalpur, where Dr. Gyanendra Kumar (PW/10) conducted postmortem examination on the body of deceased/victim and gave his report in Ex.P/15 noticing following injuries/symptoms :-

(i) Face congested, eye closed, cornea hazy, mouth closed, and tongue inside.

(ii) Lips apart, both upper and lower limb straight.

(iii) Rigor mortis present could not be ascertained as body kept in freezer on 05.05.2019. (iv) Hypostasis present posterior aspect of body, fixed, pink in colour, except pressure area. I/v prick mark on left cubital fossa,

(v) ECG pad mark on chest and abdomen evidence. Dried brownish-greenish mucoid material sticking on right side face.

The doctor has opined that death was due to cardio-respiratory failure as a result of septicemic shock.

3. During investigation, statements of the witnesses were recorded. The accused was arrested on 11.05.2019 vide arrest memo (Ex.P/23). Spot map was prepared vide Ex.P/11. Statements of the witnesses were taken. After obtaining due permission, the dead body of newly born baby was exhumed for conducting D.N.A. test and the D.N.A. samples of appellant and dead child were taken & sent for its examination to FSL, Raipur and report was obtained from FSL, Raipur, which confirmed that the appellant is biological father of dead child.

4. After completion of usual investigation, charge-sheet under Section 376 (A) IPC was filed before the jurisdictional Court. The trial court framed charges against the appellant under Section 376 of the IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act. The appellant abjured his guilt and pleaded innocence.

5. In order to establish the charge against the appellant the prosecution examined as many as 18 witnesses. The statement of the appellant under Section 313 of CrPC was also recorded in which he denied the material appearing against him and stated that he is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the case. After appreciation of evidence available on record, the learned trail court has convicted the accused/appellant and sentenced him as mentioned in para 1 of the judgment. Hence, this appeal.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the prosecution has failed to prove the case against the appellant beyond reasonable doubts. The