Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, J.
Dil Bahadur, S/o Sh. Bhakt Bahadur - Appellant
Versus
State (G.N.C.T. Of Delhi) - Respondent
Crl. A. No.1062 of 2017
Decided On : 01-12-2022
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 376, 452, 506 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 161, 164, 374(2) – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – Section 3, 5(m), 6, 9, 29 – Original complaint – Aggravated penetrative sexual assault – Offence of rape – House-trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint – Punishment for criminal intimidation – Examination of witnesses by police – Recording of confessions and statements – According to him, husband of victim’s mother was estranged and used to consume liquor with accused, at instance of mother of victim, instant case has been registered – Submitted that there is unexplained delay in lodging FIR MLC does not corroborate case of prosecution.
Finding of the court: Court is considering entire evidence so as to analyze credibility of prosecution case – PW 4 & PW 5, landlord and landlady, also stated that victim's mother is quarrelsome and did not pay rent on time – They stated that victim's mother used to quarrel with her husband with respect to liquor consumption PW-2/mother of victim however admits that her husband used to consume liquor with accused – Court finds that evidence of child victim is not of sterling nature – Same does not inspire confidence of this court to prove case beyond reasonable doubt – There is no positive medical evidence and evidence of mother of child victim also suffers with material contradictions and does not inspire confidence.
Results: Ordered Accordingly.
JUDGMENT :
1. This appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as ‘Cr.P.C.’) is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 10.08.2017 and order on sentence dated 17.08.2017, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-01, Special Court, POCSO Act, (North) Rohini Courts, Delhi, with reference to Sessions Case No. 58863/16, wherein, the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred as ‘POCSO Act’) and under Section 452 of the IPC. Vide order on sentence dated 17.08.2017, the appellant has been sentenced as under:-
| “1. For the offence u/s 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act,2012, (POCSO Act); | Rigorous imprisonment for a period of Ten Years, alongwith a fine of Rs. 30,000/-. In default, a payment of fine, the convict shall undergone Simple Imprisonment for 60 days. |
| 2. For the offence under Section 452 of IPC | Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of Three Years, alongwith a fine of Rs. 5,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the convict shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for 30 days.” |
4. Benefit of section 428 Cr.P.C. is extended to the convict”.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. According to him, the husband of the victim’s mother was estranged and used to consume liquor with the accused, therefore, at the instance of the mother of the victim, the instant case has been registered. He submitted that there is unexplained delay in lodging the FIR. The MLC does not corroborate the case of the prosecution. The testimony of the victim is full of contradictions and is completely unreliable. He further submits that the statements of the witnesses are replete with inconsistencies, and, therefore, the appellant deserves to be acquitted.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matters of Rajeevan v. State Kerala, [(2003) 3 SCC 355], Padam Singh v. State of U.P., [(2000) 1 SCC 621], Raja Ram v. State of Rajasthan, [2005 5 SCC 272], Mukhtar Ahmad Ansari v. GNCTD, [(2005) 5 SCC 258], Sadashiv Ramrai Hadbe v State of Maharashtra, [(2006) 10 SCC 92] & the decision of this court in the cases of Prem Pal v. State of NCT of Delhi, [2016 SCC OnLine Del 1595], Raj Swaroop v. Delhi, [2012 (131) DRJ 3 SC], State v. Sohan Lal, [(2011) SCC OnLine Del 1650], Babu Lal v. State, [2010 SCC OnLine Del 1353], Dilshad v. State, [2011 SCC OnLine Del 1984], and Atender Yadav v. GNCTD, Delhi, [2013 SCC OnLine Del 4322].
4. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer. He submits that the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the court below is strictly in accordance with law and the same does not call for any interference. According to him, the prosecution has been able to successfully prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, minor contradictions and omissions cannot be the ground to imply that the prosecution story is false. He further submits that the child victim remained consistent in her statement that she was subjected to sexual assault. While taking this court through the evidences and documents, learned APP for the State submits that there is no material contradictions in the oral and documentary evidence. He, therefore, submits that the appellant does not deserve to be acquitted and the order of conviction and sentence deserves to be affirmed.
5. I have heard Shri Ankur Sood, learned counsel through the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee assisted by Ms. Bheeni Goyal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Shri Utkarsh, learned APP for the State and perused the rec
Conviction can be based solely on prosecutrix's evidence, unless there are compelling reasons for seeking corroboration.
The presumption of guilt under Section 29 of the POCSO Act is not absolute and requires the prosecution to establish foundational facts before the burden shifts to the accused to rebut the presumptio....
Conviction for sexual assault can be based on the sole testimony of the victim if deemed credible, despite minor discrepancies in their statements.
Onus of prosecution cannot be discharged by referring to very strong suspicion and existence of highly suspicious facts to inculpate accused nor falsity of defence could take place of proof which pro....
The court established that in cases of sexual assault, the victim's testimony can be sufficient for conviction, and that slight penetration constitutes an offense under the POCSO Act, regardless of t....
The sole testimony of a victim in sexual assault cases can suffice for conviction if credible, emphasizing stringent punishment under the POCSO Act.
The court affirmed that the victim's consistent testimony suffices for conviction in sexual assault cases, reinforcing that age determination and credibility of the witness are pivotal in such judgme....
The sole testimony of a victim in sexual assault cases can suffice for conviction if credible, emphasizing the stringent punishment under the POCSO Act.
The reliability of the prosecutrix's testimony and the admissibility of res gestae evidence were central to the court's decision.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
