Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAJANI DUBEY, AMITENDRA KISHORE PRASAD
Lokesh Sinha, S/o. Kalyan Sinha – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Per Rajani Dubey, J.
1. This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.06.2016 passed by the Special Judge, S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities), Act, Raipur (C.G.) in Special Sessions Case No. 11/2015, whereby and whereunder appellant Lokesh Sinha has been held guilty for commission of offence and keeping in view the provision of Section 42 of the POCSO Act, sentenced as described below :-
2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on the night of 28.03.2015, at about 10:00 p.m., in village Kodobhanth, father of prosecutrix (PW-2) was sleeping in his house with his family. Prosecutrix’s younger sister and the prosecutrix (PW-3) were sleeping in another room. At about 4:00 a.m., younger sister of prosecutrix went out to collect Mahua, and at about 6:00 a.m., father (PW-2) and mother (PW-1) of prosecutrix left for their fields. When they returned home at about 6:00 p.m., the prosecutrix was not present in the house. Parents of the prosecutrix searched for her in the nearby area, but she could not be traced. On 01.04.2015, father of prosecutrix lodged a missing report of his daughter - the prosecutrix at Police Station Main
The court acquitted the accused due to reasonable doubt about the prosecutrix's age and consent, emphasizing that without credible evidence or corroboration, a conviction cannot be sustained.
The prosecution failed to prove the prosecutrix's age under 18 years and her consent negated the charges of abduction and sexual assault.
The judgment emphasizes the admissibility of school registers to determine the age of a minor, the reliability of the victim's testimony in sexual offence cases, and the mandatory minimum sentences u....
The prosecution must prove the age of the victim and the absence of consent beyond reasonable doubt; insufficient evidence leads to acquittal.
Burden of proof lies with prosecution to establish all aspects of an offense, particularly the minor status of the victim, which affects the conviction under sexual assault laws.
The prosecution failed to prove the age of the prosecutrix and the charges against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt, leading to their acquittal.
A perusal of Rule 12(3) of J.J.Rules itself reveals that the first priority has to be given to the Matriculation or equivalent certificate and in the absence thereof, to the date of birth certificate....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
