C. HARI SHANKAR, J.

1. This appeal, at the instance of the appellant Raghav, assails (i) judgment, dated 3rd March, 2014, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (hereinafter referred to as “the learned ASJ”) whereby the appellant was convicted for having committed offences under clauses (l) and (m) of Section 5 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as “the POCSO Act”) and Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as “the IPC”), as well as (ii) the subsequent order, dated 4th March, 2014, sentencing the appellant to (a) imprisonment for life, along with a fine of Rs.10,000/-, with default simple imprisonment for six months, under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and (b) rigorous imprisonment for three years along with a fine of Rs.5,000/- with default simple imprisonment of one month under Section 506 of the IPC. The benefit of Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereafter referred to as “the Cr.P.C.”) was also extended to the appellant. The sentences have been directed to run concurrently.

2. The facts of the case, insofar as they are relevant, may be set out as under:

(i) On 14th July, 2013, a complaint (Ex. PW-6/A) was filed by Gauri Shankar (PW-6), in the Begum Pur Police Station. The complainant alleged that the appellant, who was the brother-in-law of the complainant Gauri Shankar and was residing with him since three years, had been subjecting Gauri Shankar‘s daughter (who, for reasons of anonymity as mandated by law, shall be referred to, hereinafter as ‘M’) to unwelcome sexual advances, threatening her that, in case, she reported these incidents to anyone, he would disfigure her face by throwing acid on her. It was further alleged, in the complaint, that the appellant had sexually assaulted ‘M’, by taking advantage of the fact that she was in fear as a result of the threats held out by him. The complaint further averred that the appellant had also threatened the complainant Gauri Shankar and his wife Seema (PW-3) that, if they did not surrender their daughter to him (the words used in the complaint are ‘tum ladki ka haath mere haath mein do‘, which would convey the impression that the appellant desired to marry ‘M’), he would disfigure her face by throwing acid on her. It was further alleged that the appellant always carried a dagger with him, showing which he used to accost the complainant‘s children, threatening them that, if ever Gauri Shankar came out, the appellant would stab him to death. It was further alleged, in the complaint that, owing to the threats held out by the appellant, the proposed marriage, of ‘M’, had also broken. In these circumstances, the complainant requested that requisite action be taken against the appellant.

(ii) On the complaint being forwarded to SI Manju Singh (PW-11), she, along with Const. Azad (PW-8), proceeded to H. No. B-26, Rajeev Nagar, Begum Pur, the residence of the complainant Gauri Shankar (PW-6), where they met ‘M’ and her parents. SI Manju Singh recorded the statement of ‘M’, and, thereafter, proceeded, with ‘M’, her father and Const. Azad to the Sanjay Gandhi Memorial Hospital (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Hospital‘) where the medical examination of ‘M’ was conducted. The MLC (Ex.PW-4/B) of ‘M’, as recorded by Dr. Manisha Gupta (PW-9) reads thus:

‘Pt brought to casualty with A/H/O sexual assault by her maternal uncle (Mama) named Raghav for ~ 2 years.

O/E - conscious, oriented

PR – 76/min BP – 116/80 mm Hg

Chest, CVS, CNS – NAD

P/A soft BS (+)

L/E – No external injury visible at the time of Examination

Adv Referred to S/R Gynae for detailed history, Examination, opinion

Brief description of the incident

Pt (‘M’) 17 y/F R/o Rajeev Nagar, brought by SI Manju. She complained for sexual relation by maternal uncle (mama) named Raghav for past 2 year. Now he is daily blackmail to her. According to Pt these sexual relations are not giving consent - one month no sexual relation with mama

M/H – LM