SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Del) 997

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
Dalip @ Ballu - Appellant
Versus
State (Govt NCT. of Delhi) - Respondent
CRL.A. 247 of 2016
Decided On : 12-01-2018

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Arun Kumar Rathi, Adv.
For the Respondent: Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, APP with SI Vidya rawat PS Maurya Enclave.

The credibility of the testimony of the child victim and other corroborating evidence is crucial in cases involving offences against children under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

Headnote:

POCSO - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences - Section 10 - [Section 10 POCSO] - The court upheld the conviction of the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 based on the testimony of the child victim and other corroborating evidence.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 based on the testimony of the child victim who was sexually assaulted by the appellant, her paternal uncle. The appellant challenged the conviction on grounds of lack of medical examination, contradictions in statements, and delay in lodging the FIR.

Finding of the Court:

The court found no merit in the appeal and upheld the conviction of the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 10 POCSO based on the testimony of the child victim and other corroborating evidence.

Issues: The issues involved in the case included the credibility of the testimony of the child victim, the lack of medical examination, contradictions in statements, and delay in lodging the FIR.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the testimony of the child victim and other corroborating evidence to uphold the conviction of the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 10 POCSO.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction of the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 10 POCSO was upheld.

JUDGMENT :

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

1. By the present appeal, Dalip @ Ballu challenges the impugned judgment dated 23rd January, 2016 whereby he was convicted for offence punishable under Section 10 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short ‘POCSO’) and order on sentence dated 28th January, 2016 whereby he was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- for the offence punishable under Section 10 POCSO and in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of six months.

2. Learned counsel for Dalip @ Ballu submits that child victim was tutored. No internal medical examination of the child victim was got conducted which falsifies the case of the prosecution. Though, it has come in the testimony of the child victim and her mother that the child victim made a call to her mother, however, the same has not been proved. Though it was urged that the initial call was made by the mother of the child victim, however the same is not reflected in the DD No.39A. There is delay in lodging the FIR. There are contradictions in the statements of the child victim recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C.

3. Per contra, learned APP for the State submits that the impugned judgment suffers from no illegality and conviction can solely be based on the testimony of child victim.

4. Process of law was set into motion on 17th October, 2014 around 7.50 P.M. on receipt of information regarding attempt to rape upon a 10 years old girl at C-32 Jhuggi, Gandhi Market, Pitampura. The aforesaid information was recorded vide DD No.39A [Ex.PW-9/A] and was assigned to ASI Ishwar Singh (PW-9). He along with Ct. Yogesh went to the spot and met the child victim and her mother. On enquiry, he came to know that the child victim was sexually assaulted by the appellant, who is her real paternal uncle (chacha). In the meantime, WSI Upkar Kaur (PW-11) reached the spot. She sent Dalip @ Ballu to the Police Station. Thereafter, she along with W/Ct. Archana (PW-7) took the child victim and her mother to BSA Hospital and also called Ms. Madhu Dass (PW-6) from a NGO to counsel the child victim. Child victim was medically examined, however mother of child victim refused for her internal gynaecological examination. Thereafter, she recorded the statement of child victim vide Ex.PW-4/A. On the basis of aforesaid statement, FIR No.801/2014 [Ex.PW-2/A] was lodged at PS Maurya Enclave for the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC. Dalip @ Ballu was arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW-11/A. His personal search was conducted vide memo Ex.PW-11/B. He was also medically examined at BSA Hospital. Statement of child victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. [Ex.PW-3/B]. After the completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed for offences punishable under Section 376 IPC and Section 6 PCOSO Act. Charge was framed against the appellant for offence punishable under Section 6 POCSO Act.

5. Child Victim T was examined as PW-4 in Court. After ascertaining that she was capable of giving rational answers to the questions put to her, following questions were posed to her and she deposed as under:

“Q: Beta, batao kya hua tha?

Ans: Mere mummy, papa aur daadi ka jhagda hota tha, isliye meri mummy meri mausi ke ghar rehti thi, kyunki mere nana ki death ho gai hai.

Q: Beta, unka jagdha kis baat par hota tha?

Ans: Kunki meri mummy ko beta nahi hua, aur hum do hi behne hai, iss baat par papa mummy ko maarte the aur daddi bhi jagdha kjarti thi.

Q: Beta, app kahan rehte the?

Ans: Main, ghatna se 10 din pehle apni daadi ke saath rehne aayi thi.

Q: Beta, batao aapke ke saath kya ghatna hui thi?

Ans: 15 taarik, pichle saal diwali ke mahine ke baat hai, mere chacha ne sham ko 8.00 baje towel se mere muh beech diya.

Q: Beta, phir kya hua?

Ans: Meine, kaha chacha mujhe chod do, par wo mujhe chod nahi rahe the, ussi time meri daadi ne sabun lene ke liye mujhe awaz lagai aur tab unhone mujhe chod diya.

Q: Beta, phir ky

























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top