The consistent and reliable testimony of a child victim, supported by medical evidence, can lead to the conviction of the accused for offences under the POCSO Act.

JUDGMENT :

1. This revision petition filed under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C is directed against the order dated 25.01.2018, passed by the Special Judge-07, Central Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in Criminal Appeal No.280/2017 where by the learned Additional Session Judge has affirmed the judgment and order dated 27.11.2017 and the order dated 29.11.2017, passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate-04 (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. The learned Metropolitan Magistrate by order dated 27.11.2017 has convicted the petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 377, 323 and 506 IPC. By a separate order dated 29.11.2017, the accused has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two and a half years (30 months) for the offence punishable under Section 377 IPC, rigorous imprisonment for one year for offence punishable under Section 506 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for six months for offence punishable under Section 323 IPC, all the sentences shall run concurrently.

2. FIR No.200/12, dated 16.06.2012 was registered at Police Station Sarai Rohilla for offences under Sections 377, 323, 506 IPC. The FIR was lodged by Anil Kansal who is the father of the victim.

3. On investigation charge-sheet under Sections 377, 323, 341, 506 IPC has been filed on 04.09.2012. The brief facts as narrated in the charge-sheet are:

a) A PCR call was received at Police Station Sarai Rohilla, Delhi regarding unnatural sexual assault. On receiving the call, SI Abhijeet alongwith Constable Praveen reached at the spot i.e. L-264, Shastri Nagar, Delhi where the victim aged about 7 years met him alongwith his parents. Victim stated that he was sexually assaulted by a male person. The person was identified as the accused. The victim stated that on the fateful day he had not gone to school due to summer vacations and when he was playing at his terrace in the afternoon, he found an injured pigeon. The victim took that pigeon downstairs and went to a friend’s house, one Harsh Mishra, and asked him whether he would keep the pigeon. His friend told him that he could not keep the pigeon but he knew one person who keeps pigeons as pets and the victim could give the injured pigeon to that person. The victim further stated that he went to that house to find the person referred to by his friend. He was informed that the person who keeps the pigeons as pets is at the terrace of the house. The victim took the pigeon to the terrace where he found the accused. When the victim asked him whether he keeps pigeons as pets the said person answered in affirmative and the victim handed over the injured pigeon to him. When the victim was about to leave, the accused called him and asked him to remove his nicker and when the victim refused, the accused slapped him and also threatened that if the victim would not remove his nicker, he would kill him as well as the pigeon. It is stated in the charge-sheet that the accused removed his nicker. The accused removed his own pant, made the victim lie down on the floor and penetrated his private part forcibly into the private part (anus) of the victim. The victim further stated that the accused threatened him but he somehow ran away from the said house and returned back home. He narrated the said facts to his mother (PW-4 Poonam Kansal) and father (PW-2 Anil Kansal). It is stated that the victim took his father to the residence of the accused. The father of the victim apprehended the accused and called the Police. The victim as well as the accused were medically examined at Hindu Rao Hospital, clothes of the victim as well as of the accused were seized. IO also took the anal swab of the victim. Exhibits were sent for analysis and expert opinion. The statement of the victim was recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. Chargesheet was filed against the petitioner on 04.09.2012 under Sections 377, 323, 341, 506 IPC. The accused was sent for trial where he pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined 20 witnesses.

i. PW-l is the victim.

ii. PW-2 is the father o