SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Chh) 463

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAMESH SINHA, C.J., BIBHU DATTA GURU, J.
Wasim Bhathi S/o. Najiruddin – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
CRA No. 359 of 2021, CRA No. 590 of 2021, CRA No. 697 of 2021, CRA No. 818 of 2021
Decided on : 11-09-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr.Pragalbh Sharma, Advocate in CRA, Mr.J.K.Saxena, Advocate, Mr.Bharat Rajput, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr.R.S.Marhas, Additional Advocate General

IMPORTANT POINT
The victim's testimony in sexual assault cases is crucial and can suffice for conviction without corroboration, provided it is credible and consistent.

Headnote:

(A) POCSO Act, 2012 – Sections 6, 363, 366 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 363/34, 366/34, 506 Part II – Conviction of appellants for kidnapping and sexual assault of a minor – The trial court convicted the appellants based on the prosecutrix's testimony and corroborative evidence, including medical reports and identification parades. The court emphasized the importance of the victim's testimony in sexual assault cases, stating that corroboration is not a prerequisite for conviction. (Paras 20, 21, 33)

(B) Evidence – Testimony of Victim – The court highlighted that the evidence of a victim of sexual assault is entitled to great weight and should not be dismissed due to minor inconsistencies. The court must assess the totality of circumstances and the credibility of the victim's testimony. (Paras 20, 21)

Facts of the case: The prosecutrix was kidnapped and sexually assaulted by the appellants, who were identified by her during the trial. Medical examinations corroborated her claims. (Paras 3, 4, 33)

Findings of Court: The court upheld the trial court's conviction of the appellants, finding sufficient evidence to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 33, 34)

Issues: The main issues included the credibility of the prosecutrix's testimony and the adequacy of evidence to support the conviction. (Paras 8, 9, 10)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the victim's testimony, if credible, can be sufficient for conviction without the need for corroboration, emphasizing the sensitivity required in handling sexual assault cases. (Paras 20, 21)

Result: Appeals dismissed for Wasim Bhathi, Devnath @ Furru Sahu, Sonal Pal, and Jeevanlal Tandon; conviction upheld. Appeal of Parvati Poyam partly allowed, modifying her sentence. (Paras 36, 37)

JUDGMENT :

Per Ramesh Sinha, CJ

1. Since the aforesaid four criminal appeals have been filed against the impugned judgment dated 19.02.2021 passed by the Special Judge (POCSO Act, 2012), Mahasamund in Special Criminal Case No.H-09-2019, they were clubbed & heard together and being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. Appellants-Wasim Bhathi (A1), Devnath @ Furru Sahu (A2), Sonal Pal (A3), Jeevanlal Tandon (A4) and Parvati Poyam (A5) have preferred these four criminal appeals under Section 374(2) of the CrPC questioning the impugned judgment dated 19.02.2021 passed by the Special Judge (POCSO Act), 2012, Mahasamund in Special Criminal Case No.H-09-2019, by which the Special Judge has convicted appellants-Wasim Bhathi, Devnath @ Furru Sahu, Sonal Pal and Jeevanlal Tandon for offence under Sections 363/34, 366/34 of the IPC, Section 6 of the POCSO Act and Section 506 PartII/34 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for three years and fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for one month, RI for five years and fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for one month, RI for twenty years and fine of Rs.25000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for three months and RI for two years and fine of Rs.3000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for one month. The Special Judge has also convicted appellant-Parvati Poyam for offence under Sections 363/34 and 366/34 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for three years and fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for one month and RI for five years and fine of Rs.3000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for two months.

3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the prosecutrix’s father made a report at Tumgaon Police Station stating that on 24.04.2019, around 6:00 P.M., his daughter/prosecutrix left home to go to the shop, but did not return. Despite searching, her whereabouts could not be found. The complainant's minor daughter was allegedly lured and taken away by an unknown person. On the basis of report lodged by father of the prosecutrix the police of Police Station Tumgaon registered the FIR in Crime No.86/2019 for offence under Section 363 of the IPC vide Ex.P-6. Spot map was prepared by the investigating officer vide Ex.P-7. Investigating officer also prepared spot map vide Exs.P-8 and P-9. Progress card of the prosecutrix in which date of birth was mentioned as 12.01.2004 was seized vide Ex.P-10. Patwari also prepared spot map vide Exs.P-12 and P-12A. During the investigation, on 27.04.2019, the prosecutrix was recovered from the possession of appellant Parvati Poyam in Bacheli vide Ex.P-19. Consent for medical examination was obtained from the prosecutrix vide Ex.P-20. MLC of the prosecutrix was conducted by Dr.Anubha Jyotsna (PW-6) vide Ex.P-17 and found following injuries

    i. Labia majora slightly swelled, pain present while pelvic examination.

ii. Hymen torn.

iii. No bleeding pelvic; white discharge present.

iv. No any injury present.

Two vaginal smear slide and public hair sample and a pink color salwar stained marked with blue pen is sent for chemical analysis. Opinion and confirmation can be done after the deep analysis report. Sexual intercourse has been taken place.

4. Statement of the prosecutrix was recorded under Section 164 CrPC before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mahasamund vide Ex.P-21 and thereafter Section 376/34 and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act was added. Test identification parade was conducted by the Executive Magistrate / Naib Tahsildar, in which the prosecutrix has identified appellants Devnath Sahu, Sonal Pal and Wasim Bhathi vide Ex.P-22. Dakhil kharij register of the prosecutrix in which her date of birth was mentioned as 12.01.04 was seized vide Ex.P-24. Investigating officer also prepared the spot map vide Ex.P-29. Appellant Parvati Poyam was arrested on 29.04.2019 vide arrest memo Ex.P-30. Appellant Devnath

            Click Here to Read the rest of this document
            1
            2
            3
            4
            5
            6
            7
            8
            9
            10
            11
            SupremeToday Portrait Ad
            supreme today icon
            logo-black

            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

            qr

            Scan Me!

            India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

            For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

            whatsapp-icon Back to top