The sole testimony of a victim in sexual assault cases can suffice for conviction if credible, without needing corroboration unless compelling reasons exist.

Judgment :

(Ramesh Sinha, CJ.)

1. Heard Mr. Amit Buxy, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the respondent/State.

2. This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, “Cr.P.C.”) is directed against the impugned +0530 judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.06.2023 passed by the learned Special Upper Session Judge, Khairagarh (C.G.) in Special Sessions Case No. 35 of 2021, whereby the accused-appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under :-

3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 13.11.2021, at about 12:30 p.m., the complainant, father (PW-5) of the victim, lodged a written complaint at Salhewara Police Station, stating that on the night of 11.11.2021, at about 8:30 p.m., he fell asleep after dinner, and his daughter, the victim (PW-2), was playing outside. When he woke up, his wife told him that the victim was missing. They searched for the victim and found her at the house of the accused, crying and frightened. The victim told her father that around 9.00 p.m., while she was on her way to her aunt's house, the accused caught her, covered her mouth with a gamcha (scarf), and threatened to kill her if she screamed. He then took her to his house and raped her twice. The victim was too scared to tell anyone. On the basis of above complaint, the Police registered the FIR (Ex.P/11) against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2) (d), 506, and 342 of the IPC and Sections 4 and 5 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The statement of the victim vide Ex.P/4 was recorded before a Judicial Magistrate, and her medical examination was conducted vide Ex.P/28 with her guardian's consent (Ex.P/2). Witnesses statements were recorded, and a site plan and map of the crime scene were prepared. The seized property was sent to the FSL for analysis. Thereafter, the accused was arrested vide Ex.P/17.

4. After completing the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the accused under Sections 342, 363, 376(2)(j)(d), 376(3) and 506-II of the IPC and Section 3 under Section 4(2) of the POCSO Act before the learned Special Upper Session Judge, Khairagarh (C.G.) and the case was registered as Special Session Case No. 35 of 2021. The statements of witnesses were recorded.

5. Learned trial Court framed charges for the offences punishable under Sections 342, 363, 376(2)(j)(d), 376(3) and 506-II of the IPC and Section 3 under Section 4(2) of the POCSO Act against the appellant.

6. In order to establish the charges against the appellant, the prosecution examined as many as 14 witnesses and exhibited 34 documents. The statement of the appellant under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was also recorded, in which he denied the materials 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 trial Court has convicted the accused/appellant and sentenced him as mentioned in paragraph-2 of the judgment. Hence, this appeal.

7. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the accused/appellant, the prosecution witness have made contradictory statements and there are so many omissions and improvements in their statements and as such their statement do not inspire confidence so as to convict the appellant. He further argued