The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of the provisions of the POSCO Act, particularly regarding the definition of sexual offences, the age criteria for defining a child, and the appropriate punishment for different categories of sexual assault.

Heard Mr. K. Pathak, learned Amicus Curiae, appearing for the appellant and Mr. D. Das, leaned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the Opposite Party.

2. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the judgment and sentence dated 23.09.2015, passed by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Golaghat in Sessions Case (Spl. POSCO Case) No. 20/2015 (GR Case No. 235/2015) under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act. 2012 (in short the POSCO Act), in which he was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 10 (ten) years, pay fine of Rs. 2,000.00 (Rupees two thousand) and in default to undergo further imprisonment of 1 (one) month.

3. The present appellant Sri Lakhi Murmur, son of late Bengal Murmur, a resident of Jugalati Goan under Bokakhat Police Station in the District of Golaghat, Assam was prosecuted as accused in Bokakhat P.S. Case No. 31/2015 under Section 376 IPC read with Section 8 of the POSCO Act. It is the case of the prosecution that on 07.02.2015 at about 10.00 a.m. in the morning he committed rape upon his niece Smti Anita Soren (actual name is withheld) aged about 14 years old and also attempted to kill her by pressing her neck.

4. On receipt of the ejahar from the complainant Sri Hari Nath Soren, son of Haria Soren on 09.02.2015, the Officer-in-Charge of Bokakhat Police Station registered the above noted case and endorsed S.I. Phani Madhab Saikia to investigate the case. The said Investigating Officer investigated the case, examined the victim by doctor, collected report and on completion of investigation, he sent up the present accused-appellant for trial under Section 376 IPC read with Section 8 of the POSCO Act. The court of the learned Special Judge (POSCO)/the District & Sessions Judge, Golaghat framed charges under Section 6 of the POSCO Act and on being read over and explained the same to which the accused-appellant pleaded not guilty of the offence.

5. The prosecution side has examined as many as 8 (eight) witnesses including the Medical Officer and the I.O. in support of its case. After closure of the prosecution witnesses, the accused- appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in which he denied the total case and adduced no evidence in defence. The learned court below, after considering all the material evidence on record and after hearing the argument of both the learned counsels of prosecution and defence side finally, the appellant was convicted and sentenced as aforesaid. Being aggrieved, the accused appellant has preferred this appeal from jail.

6. Mr. K. Pathak, learned Amicus Curiae, appearing on behalf of the accused-appellant submits that the offence as apparent from the materials on record and from the statement of the victim is a case of aggravated sexual assault as provided under Section 9 of the POSCO Act. Such being the position, the accused-appellant ought to have convicted and sentenced under Section 10 of the POSCO Act. The punishment as prescribed, shall not be less than 5 years, which may extend to 7 years and shall also be liable to fine. In support of his contention, Mr. Pathak submits that the case is well covered under Section 9(n) and 9(p) of the Act. Accordingly, Mr. Pathak submits that the conviction and sentence of the accused-appellant is liable to be reduced to the maximum period as prescribed by Section 10 of the said Act as against the one for 10 years.

7. Mr. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submit that the submission of the learned Amicus Curiae cannot be taken into consideration. If the Medical Report (Ext.2) is taken into consideration, as apparent from the said report, the hymen of the victim was found to be ruptured. Accordingly, if the said medical piece of evidence is considered then the offence will fall under “aggravated penetrative sexual assault” as defined under Section 5 of the POCSO Act. In such a nature of offence and/ or offences, Section 6 of the said Act stipulates the punis