Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Amit Bansal, J.
Ranjeet Kumar Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of NCT of Delhi – Respondent
Cr.A. 50 of 2022
Decided On : 14-08-2023
POCSO - Conviction under Sections 342/363/376 of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act - Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) - [342, 363, 376, 6] - The court discussed the consistency of the victim's testimony, the absence of injuries on the victim's private parts, and the statutory presumption raised against the accused under Section 29 of the POCSO Act. The court emphasized that minor contradictions in the victim's statement do not make her testimony unreliable and held that the appellant failed to rebut the statutory presumption, thus upholding the conviction.
Fact of the Case:
The victim, a four and a half-year-old girl, was taken to the appellant's house where he inserted his finger into her private parts. The appellant was convicted for the offences under Sections 342/363/376 of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the victim's testimony to be consistent and reliable, and emphasized that minor contradictions do not make her testimony unreliable. The court upheld the conviction based on the statutory presumption raised against the accused under Section 29 of the POCSO Act.
Issues: Consistency of the victim's testimony, absence of injuries on the victim's private parts, reliance on the statutory presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act.
Ratio Decidendi: Minor contradictions in the victim's statement do not make her testimony unreliable. The absence of injuries on the victim's private parts does not negate the commission of penetrative sexual assault. The statutory presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act must be rebutted by the accused to avoid conviction.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant's conviction under Sections 342/363/376 of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act was upheld.
JUDGMENT
1. The present appeal has been filed seeking setting aside the judgment dated 18th September, 2021 and the order on sentence dated 26th November, 2021, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTSC) (POCSO Act)-01, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, whereby the appellant was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 342/363/376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO).
2. The appellant was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of twelve years for the conviction under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and three years rigorous imprisonment under Section 363 of the IPC and six months rigorous imprisonment under Section 342 of the IPC.
3. The brief facts of the case as set up by the prosecution are as follows:
3.1. The victim, a girl child of four and a half years, was playing in the street outside her house on 11th June, 2017. When the mother of the victim could not find the victim, she sent her husband, being the father of the victim, to look for her. The father of the victim reached the house of the appellant, who was their neighbour and knocked at the door which was locked from inside. He also called for the victim but there was no response. The father of the victim, after some time, again went to the house of the appellant and called for the victim and received her response from inside the door. After a couple of minutes, the appellant dressed in his underwear opened the door and the victim was found present inside the room.
3.2. The father of the victim brought the victim back to their house and told the mother of the victim about the incident. The victim then informed her mother that the appellant took the victim to his house, gave her `Mango Frooti' and after removing her underwear, inserted his finger inside her private parts.
3.3. After hearing about the unfortunate incident that happened with their daughter, the parents informed the police. The police on the basis of the statement of the mother registered the FIR No. 72/17 under Section 376 of the IPC and Sections 4/6 of the POCSO Act at Police Station Gulabi Bagh. The statement of the victim under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) was also recorded and the accused was sent for his medical examination.
3.4. The victim along with her parents and a police official went to the Hindu Rao Hospital, where her medical examination was conducted and the MLC [Exhibit PW4/B] was prepared by the concerned doctor.
3.5. The appellant was arrested on 12th June, 2017 and subsequently, the charge sheet was filed.
4. The Sessions Court after examining the witnesses, analysing the evidence and hearing the arguments convicted the appellant for the offences under Sections 342/363/376 of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
5. The counsel appearing for the appellant has made the following submissions:
I. There are material contradictions in the statement of the victim. Whereas the victim in her deposition before the Trial Court as well as in her statement under Section 161 of the CrPC has stated that the appellant had inserted his finger in her private parts, however, in her statement under Section 164 of the CrPC given to the Magistrate, she has stated that the appellant had only touched her private parts.
II. The mother of the victim in the FIR has only mentioned regarding the appellant touching the private parts of the victim and no mention of penetration has been made.
III. The entire case of the prosecution rests only on the sole testimony of the victim and has not been corroborated by the medical evidence on record. He submits that the testimony of the victim cannot be relied upon without corroboration as the same suffers from material contradictions. In this regard, he has placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in State (NCT of Delhi) v. Om Prakash, 2019 SCC OnLine Del 11262.
IV. The MLC Report records that there was no redness, bit
Minor contradictions in the victim's statement do not make her testimony unreliable, and the absence of injuries on the victim's private parts does not negate the commission of penetrative sexual ass....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the testimony of the prosecutrix to be reliable and of a sterling quality for a conviction under the POCSO Act. The judgment....
The unblemished and trustworthy testimony of a victim can be the sole basis for conviction, and medical evidence can corroborate the victim's testimony.
The reliability of the prosecutrix's testimony and the admissibility of res gestae evidence were central to the court's decision.
The victim's testimony in a sexual assault case stands at a higher pedestal than injured witness and needs no corroboration.
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 judgment established the distinction between rape and sexual assault, emphasizing the requirement of penetration for the former, and the physical contact without penetration for the latter under ....
A conviction for penetrative sexual assault requires clear and corroborative evidence of penetration, which was not established in this case; however, the appellant was guilty of sexual harassment un....
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
