IMPORTANT POINT
The sole testimony of a victim in sexual assault cases can suffice for conviction if credible, emphasizing stringent punishment under the POCSO Act.

JUDGMENT :

Per Ramesh Sinha, C.J.

1. This appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 02.12.2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.S.C. (POCSO Act), Raigarh in Special Pocso Case No. 64/2021, whereby the appellant has been convicted for offence under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter called as ‘POSCO’) and sentenced to undergo RI for 20 years and fine of Rs.5000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo imprisonment for six months.

2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that father of the prosecutrix made written complaint (Ex.P-5) in the Police Station Kotwali, Raigarh alleging that the victim aged 16 years, who is his daughter, is mentally weak, lives at home. On 16.08.2021 at about 2 P.M. he came home after work, his wife told that accused Bhundu taking the victim to his house, she is telling that she was raped, she was screaming, then both he and his wife asked the victim, then she told that in the afternoon she was sitting in front of her maternal aunt’s house, then the accused made a hand gesture and on calling to her house, she went away, the accused took her inside the house, locked the door and raped her forcefully, then opened the door, she came home and told her mother about the incident. On the basis of written complaint, the police of Police Station Kotwali, Raigarh registered the FIR in Crime No.1155/2021 for offence under Section 376 of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act against the appellant vide Ex.P-6. Spot map was prepared by the investigating officer vide Ex.P-1. Rs.20 note given by the accused to the prosecutrix was seized on the production of the prosecutrix vide Ex.P-3. The statement of the prosecutrix was recorded under Section 164 CrPC vide Ex.P-4. The appellant was arrested on 17.08.2021 vide arrest memo Ex.P-9. The Station House Officer of Police Station-Kotwali written letter to the Head Master for dakhil kharij register regarding the date of birth of the prosecutrix vide Ex.P-10. Dakhil kharij register of the prosecutrix for the year 2011-12 whose Saral No.925 the victim Ku.Rakhi father Kishan Kumar mother Santoshi Bai date of birth 01.06.2005 date of leaving school 01.04.2017 class 5th passed is recorded was seized vide Ex.P-11. Copy of dakhil kharij register in which date of birth of the prosecutrix has been mentioned as 01.06.2005 has been seized vide Ex.P-13C. The prosecutrix was sent for MLC to Kirodimal Government Hospital, Raigarh where Dr.Rakhi Agrawal (PW-5) examined her vide Ex.P-15 and found that no injury over hand, back, leg, abdomen, face, no injury in perineal region, one finger inserted in vagina, hymen absent, no bleeding present at the time of examination. Two vaginal slides and one dark purple coloured panty of the prosecutrix were seized vide Ex.P-16. The accused was also sent for medical examination to the Government Hospital, Raigarh vide Ex.P-18 where the doctor has examined him and opined that the patient can conduct sexual activity. Slides and panty seized from the prosecutrix were sent to FSL for chemical examination vide Ex.P-22 and as per FSL report (Ex.P-23), semen stains and human sperm were found in Article A and B i.e. slides and panty seized from the prosecutrix.

3. After completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was filed before the Additional Sessions Judge F.T.S.C., Raigarh for trial in accordance with law.

4. The trial Court has framed charges against the appellant under Section 376(J) 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 8 witnesses and exhibited the documents (Exs.P-1 to P-23). 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 evid