The court emphasized that the age of a victim must be proven with lawful evidence rather than relying on uncorroborated school records, rendering prior convictions based on inadequate evidence perverse.

JUDGMENT :

1. This criminal appeal has been preferred under Section 374(2) of the CrPC against judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 31.03.2022 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court (POCSO Act), Ramanujganj Distt., Balrampur-Ramanujganj (CG) in Special Sessions Trial (POCSO) Case No.44/2019, whereby the learned Special Judge, after holding the appellant guilty, convicted and sentenced him in the following manner:-

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that, on 30.7.2019, minor victim lodged FIR (Ex-P/1) against the appellant stating interalia that on 30.7.2019 at about 6.00 am, when she had gone towards agricultural filed to attend nature call, that time. the appellant stopped her and after holding her hands, he dragged her towards the pit (ditch), pulled her leggings and undergarments and got on top of her with ill intention, thereby he molested her. On hearing her screaming, her father and grand-father ran towards her and on seeing them, the appellant ran away from the spot. After lodging of the FIR, the police recorded statement (Ex-P/3) of the victim under Section 164 CrPC before concerned Judicial Magistrate First Class. She was medically examined vide MLC report (Ex-P/13) by Dr. Arun Kumar (PW-12), prepared spot map (Ex-P/5), also got prepared spot map from concerned Patwari (Ex-P/2), recorded statement of the witnesses under Section 161 CrPC, seized marksheet of Class-V of the victim vide seizure Memo Ex-P/6 from father of the victim and also seized admission discharge register (Dalhil Kharij Register) of the victim pertaining to her date of birth vide Ex-P/7 and the appellant was arrested vide Ex-P/11. After completion of investigation, charge sheet for the offence under Sections 354(A)(1)(i), 354 (D) of IPC and Section 7/8 of the POCSO Act, has been filed before the Fast Track Special Court.

3. The learned Fast Track Special Court framed charges under Section 7/8 of POCSO Act, alternatively charges under Section 354(A)(1)(i) IPC and Section 11/12 of POCSO Act, alternatively charge under Section 354 (D) of IPC, against the appellant/accused, who denied the charges and claimed trial.

4. In order to bring home the guilt of the appellant/accused, the prosecution has examined as many as 13 witnesses and exhibited 14 documents. Statement of the appellant under Section 313 CrPC, was recorded, in which, he denied all the circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution evidence, claimed himself to be innocent and prayed for trial. He has not examined any witness in his defence.

5. The learned Special Court after appreciating the evidence adduced by the prosecution, convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned in the opening paragraph of this judgment, hence, this appeal.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that, the victim is said to be minor, but no any lawful documentary evidence has been proved by the prosecution in this regard, rather, the learned Special Court has held her minor only on the basis of date of birth of the victim mentioned in the Dakhil Kharij Register (Ex-P/14C) and marksheet of Class-V, whereas it has not be