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.

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 Mainpur. The police registered Crime No. 40/2015 against an unknown person under Section 363 IPC. The prosecutrix had appeared privately for the Class 10 examination in the year 2015. Prior to that, she was studying in Class 9 in the High School at village Gopalpur, where she became acquainted with accused - Lokesh Sinha, and they used to meet each other. On 28.03.2015, at about 11:00 p.m., the accused asked the prosecutrix over mobile phone to come out of her house. Acting on his request, she came out. The accused met her in front of her house, carrying his belongings, and from there he took her to village Gaurghat. From Gaurghat, he took her on foot towards the Gariaband road. On reaching Teemnapur at about 7:00 a.m., he put her in a bus coming from Mainpur and brought her to Raipur. At Raipur Railway Station, on 29.03.2015, the accused took the prosecutrix to a temple and filled her forehead (maang). They stayed at the railway station for two days while the accused looked for work. On 01.04.2015, the accused sold the prosecutrix’s mobile phone and took her to village Sankara, District Durg on same day. In village Sankara, the accused and the prosecutrix worked as labourer in the construction work of the boundary wall of an under-construction factory and resided in the labour quarters. The accused, on the pretext of marriage, kept her with him and had sexual intercourse with her, representing her as his wife. The police recovered the prosecutrix from the accused. With the consent of the prosecutrix and her parents, and with permission obtained from the Tehsildar, Mainpur, her medical/genital examination was conducted by a Medical Officer. The underwear of the prosecutrix was seized. After her medical examination, the prepared slides were also seized. The police prepared spot map of the prosecutrix’s house and also had a map prepared by the Patwari. The birth register entry of the prosecutrix was seized from the Kotwar. From Ramsai Nayak, the Class 8 marksheet and caste certificate of the prosecutrix were seized. The underwear of the accused was also seized, and both the accused and his underwear were medically examined. Statements of witnesses were recorded, and the accused was arrested. The slides and underwear of the prosecutrix were sent for chemical examination. Human spermatozoa were found on the slides of the prosecutrix. After completing the usual investigation, charge sheet was filed before the jurisdic