The conviction for sodomy of a minor requires clear evidence of the victim's age and the crime, while mitigating factors can justify a reduction in sentencing.

JUDGMENT

Chandra Dhari Singh, J. The instant appeal has been filed under section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter "Cr.P.C.") by the Appellant/Accused against the judgment of conviction dated 15th January, 2016 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-01, North District, Rohini, Delhi (hereinafter "learned ASJ") in Session Case (SC) No. 39/2015, wherein Appellant/Accused was convicted for the offences punishable under sections 323/506(II)/377 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter "IPC") and under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter "POCSO Act"), and vide order on sentence dated 28th January, 2016, Appellant/Accused had been awarded with the following sentences:

• Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 10 years along with fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default Simple Imprisonment for a period of 1 month for the offence punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act;
• Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 3 months along with fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default further Simple Imprisonment for a period of 10 days for the offence punishable each for offences under Section 323 of the IPC;
• Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 1 year along with fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default further Simple Imprisonment for a period of 1 month for the offence punishable each for offences under Section 506 (II) of the IPC;
• Since, sentence is awarded to the convict for the offence punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, no separate sentence is awarded to convict for the offence punishable under Section 377 of the IPC;
• Sentences shall run concurrently and the benefit of Section 428 of the Cr.P.C is accorded to the convict.

2. Factual matrix of the matter in nutshell is that the instant FIR bearing No. 18/2015 was registered on the written complaint lodged by the complainant/father of the victim. As per the FIR, on 5th January, 2015 at about 8:00 P.M., Complainant's son aged about 10 years disclosed him that on the very same day at about 4:00 P.M. Appellant/Accused herein took him to Nala (Drainage area), Near DESU Colony, Rana Pratap Bagh, Delhi and committed sodomy (unnatural sexual act) and threatened him not to tell the incident to anybody otherwise he would kill him. On the said complaint instant FIR was lodged and the Appellant/Accused was arrested on the same day, i.e., on 5th January, 2015.

3. The offences levelled against the accused were triable by the Sessions Court, therefore, the learned Magistrate wisely transmitted the proceedings to the concerned Sessions Court for trial of the accused within the purview of law. The learned ASJ framed the charges against the accused, to which the Appellant/Accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In order to bring home guilt of the accused, prosecution examined total 7 witnesses in this case namely, PW-1: Victim; PW-2: Principal of the School in which the victim was studying, who had proved the date of birth of the victim as 28th December, 2005 as per his School Record which is Ex PW2/A-D; PW-3: HC Jai Bhagwan; PW-4: Ct. Ram Swaroop; PW-5: Complainant/father of the victim, who had deposed on the lines of his complaint and proved it on record as Ex PW5/A; PW-6: Virender Singh, learned Metropolitan Magistrate (hereinafter "learned MM"), who recorded the statement of victim under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C, which is exhibited as Ex PW l/A; and PW-7: SI Kuldeep Singh, IO of the case, who had prepared the tehrir, exhibited as Ex PW