Back
ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
Dosen Kamki, Son of Shri Kendo Kamki – Appellant
Versus
State Of AP. , Represented through the Public Prosecutor – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. K. Tama, learned counsel for the appellant. Also head Mr. U. Bori, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Arunachal Pradesh.
2. This is an appeal under Section 101(5) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 read with Section 374 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 assailing the Judgment dated 31.08.2021 and Sentence dated 09.09.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge POCSO cum Children Court, Aalo in Special POCSO Case No. 01/2020, whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 6/8 of POCSO Act, 2012 read with Section 376(2) (a) (i) of IPC and was (I) sentenced to undergo ten (10) years of rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1000/-(Rupees one thousand) only for the offence punishable under Section 6 of POCSO Act read with Section 376 (2) (a) (i) of IPC and (II) sentenced to undergo imprisonment for three (3) years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1000/-(Rupees one thousand) only for the offence punishable under Section 8 of POCSO Act and failing to pay the fines in both, simple imprisonment for three (3) years each.
3. The prosecution was set into motion on the basis of an FIR dated 21.04.2019 lodged bef
The conviction of the appellant was overturned due to insufficient evidence proving the prosecutrix's minority, emphasizing that consensual relationships cannot be classified as criminality without c....
It is well settled that ossification test or other medical test though is a guiding factor for determining age but it is not conclusive or incontrovertible and leaves a margin of error of two years o....
The prosecution failed to prove the victim's age as a minor, undermining the conviction for sexual offences under IPC and POCSO Act.
Prosecution under POCSO Act cannot be sustained where prosecution has failed to prove age of victim girl that she was minor at the time of alleged incident.
(1) Once prosecution failed to prove that victim was below 18 years of age, evidence of her consent, assumes importance.(2) There is no difference as regards minority between child in conflict with l....
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
