IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Mukta Gupta, J.
GHANSHYAM - Appellant
Vs.
STATE Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1097 of 2016
Decided On : 10-04-2019
POCSO Act - Conviction under Section 10 - Section 10 of POCSO Act - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the evidence presented by the prosecution, including the victim's testimony and the statements of witnesses, to establish the offence punishable under Section 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The court upheld the conviction based on the cogent testimony of the prosecutrix, despite the absence of physical evidence such as the 'kassi' that the victim had purportedly gone to retrieve from the house where the appellant was employed.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for an offence punishable under Section 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) based on the victim's testimony that he misbehaved with her while she was retrieving a 'kassi' from the house where the appellant was working as a guard.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt based on the victim's testimony and the immediate lodging of the complaint by her mother. The court rejected the appellant's plea of alibi and false implication due to previous enmity, upholding the conviction and the minimum sentence of 5 years' imprisonment.
Issues: The issues revolved around the credibility of the victim's testimony, the absence of physical evidence, and the appellant's pleas of alibi and false implication due to previous enmity.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the cogent testimony of the prosecutrix, immediate lodging of the complaint, and the rejection of the appellant's pleas of alibi and false implication due to previous enmity.
Final Decision: The court upheld the conviction under Section 10 of the POCSO Act and dismissed the appeal, affirming the minimum sentence of 5 years' imprisonment for the appellant.
Understood. Please provide the legal document content (or specify {content}) for analysis, and I'll extract key points with references as instructed (e.g., (!) (!) ).
Mukta Gupta, J.
Ghanshyam challenges the impugned judgment dated 29th October, 2015 convicting him for offence punishable under Section 10 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short 'POCSO Act') and the order on sentence dated 2nd November 2015 directing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default whereof to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months, for offence punishable under Section 10 of POCSO Act.
2. Assailing the conviction, Learned Counsel for the appellant contends that there is no evidence on record except the statement of the victim child on whose testimony the conviction is based. He further states that there was previous enmity between the appellant and the parents of the victim with respect to water due to which a false case has been registered against the appellant. Moreover, there is no investigation with respect to the 'kassi' and the same has not been returned or seized. In the alternate it is prayed that the appellant be released on the period undergone.
3. Learned APP for the State on the other hand submits that the impugned judgment and order on sentence suffers from no illegality.
4. Prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt from the testimony of the victim. Prosecution case sprung from a PCR call received on 29th June 2013 at about 8:04 P.M., informing that one person was misbehaving with a girl at Sector 22, Pocket 10, House no. 25, Begumpur. Aforesaid information was recorded vide DD No.66 B (Ex.PW-2/A) and assigned to SI Rajesh. He along with Ct. Rajesh reached the spot where he met the victim aged about 10-11 years and her mother. He recorded the statement of the child victim in the presence of her mother who stated that on 29th June 2013 at about 10:00 A.M., her mother sent her to the house opposite theirs which was under construction to get a 'kassi'. One person namely Ghanshyam (Appellant herein) was the guard on duty at the house. He used to stay there with his family but his wife and children had gone somewhere 3-4 days prior to the date of incident. When she went to House no. 51 and asked the appellant for the 'kassi', he told her the same was kept on the first floor and she could take it from there. When she was going to the first floor to take the 'kassi' the appellant also followed her. He caught hold of her, kissed her and pressed her chest. When he saw her panic, he left her after which she picked up the 'kassi' and came home. In the evening she informed her mother of the incident. When her mother went to confront the appellant regarding the same, he started fighting with her. Seeing the fight, people gathered over there and the appellant started abusing her mother after which he ran away from the spot. Aforesaid statement was recorded vide Ex.PW-4/A. On the basis of the aforesaid statement, FIR No. 206/2013 (Ex.PW-1/B) was registered at PS Begumpur for the offence punishable under Section 354 IPC.
5. SI Rajesh prepared the site plan vide Ex.PW-4/C at the instance of the victim child. He made inquiries about the whereabouts of the appellant from the neighboring people. After some time, they saw one person coming from the side of the park and the said person, on seeing the police tried to run away. On suspicion, he was apprehended and shown to the victim child and her mother who identified him as Ghanshyam. He was arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW-4/D and his personal search was done vide Ex.PW-4/E.
6. On 30th June 2013, he called the landlord and contractor of House no. 51, Pocket 10, Sector-22, Rohini where the appellant was working as a guard and recorded their statements.
7. On 1st July 2013, the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. vide Ex.PW-8/B wherein she reiterated the statement on the basis of which FIR was registered.
8. SI Rajesh obtained the school certificate of the victim vide Ex.PW-3/E wherein her date of birth was mentioned as 29th Sep
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.