IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
MALASRI NANDI, J.
Sriman Dev Sarma S/o Late Guru Dutta Dev Sarma – Appellant
Versus
The State of Assam and Another – Respondents
Crl. Appeal No. 140 of 2021
Decided On : 21-06-2023
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 448, 376, (2)(i), 511 - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Section 7, 8, 10 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 164, 313 - Minor girl - Aggravated sexual assault - Tried to commit rape - Prosecution lodged stating that accused is his adjacent neighbour - In absence of any person in his house, accused entered into his house - accused embraced her and kissed her on her cheeks and also touched her private parts - Accused also tried to commit rape on her – If testimony is found to be wholly reliable, there would be no necessity of corroboration and if it was found to be wholly unreliable, it would have to be discarded - Para 42.
Finding of the Court:
Accused pushed her and pulled down her on bed, kissed on her cheeks and touched her breasts - Victim disclosed about incident to her mother, which was supported by mother of victim - Victim was consistent in her statement before Investigating Officer and when her statement was recorded by Magistrate under Section 164 CrPC - Other witnesses, i.e., PW-5 and PW-7, are neighbours of informant and accused, who also supported fact that mother of victim informed them about incident immediately after occurrence - Aggravating circumstance against convict is that he had sexually assaulted girl child aged about 11 years by touching her breasts repeatedly - Other circumstance is that number of cases of girl child abuse are on rise in society - Offence under Section 10 of POCSO Act carries maximum sentence of seven years imprisonment and fine - Therefore, interest of justice will be met if convict is sentenced to minimum punishment of 5 (five) years.
Result: Appeal partly allowed.
JUDGMENT :
MALASRI NANDI, J.
1. Heard Mr. R. Singha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State of Assam.
2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the Judgment and Order dated 30.03.2021, passed by the learned Special Judge, (POCSO) Nalbari, in Special (POCSO) Case No. 32/18, by which the accused appellant has been convicted under Section 448 IPC & Section 10 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012,(hereinafter, in brevity, referred to as “the POCSO Act”), the accused has preferred this appeal. The appellant was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 7 (seven) years and to pay a fine of 25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) only, and in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for 5 (five) months for the offence under Section 10 of the POCSO Act, and the accused appellant was also sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a term of 1 (one) year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- (Rupees One thousand), and in default of payment of fine to undergo Simple Imprisonment for 5 (five) days for the offence under Section 448 IPC. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
3. The case of the prosecution is that Hemen Das, who is the father of the victim lodged an FIR before the Officer-In-Charge, Tihu Police Station, stating inter alia that the accused is his adjacent neighbour. On 22.07.2018, at about 11:00 am, in absence of any person in his house, the accused entered into his house. At that time, his minor daughter aged about 11 years was writing something inside the room. Suddenly, the accused embraced her and kissed her on her cheeks and also touched her private parts. It is also alleged that the accused also tried to commit rape on her. When his daughter raised alarm, the accused fled away from the scene.
4. On receipt of the FIR, a case was registered vide Tihu PS Case No. 129/2018, under Sections 448/376/511 IPC, read with Section 10 of the POCSO Act, 2012, against the accused appellant and investigation was initiated.
5. During investigation, the Investigating Officer visited the place of occurrence, recorded the statements of the witnesses. The victim was also sent to the Court for recording her statement under Section 164 CrPC by the Magistrate. She was also medically examined. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted against the accused appellant under Sections 448/376/511 IPC, read with Section 10 of the POCSO Act.
6. During trial, on appearance of the accused appellant, charge was framed under Sections 448/376(2)(i)/511 IPC, read with Section 10 of the POCSO Act, which was read over and explained to the accused/ appellant, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
7. To prove the guilt of the accused/ appellant, the prosecution examined 8 (eight) witnesses and exhibited ten documents. On the other hand, the accused appellant adduced three witnesses in support of his defence. After completion of the trial, the statement of the accused appellant was recorded under Section 313 CrPC, wherein he denied the evidence of the witnesses made against him and pleaded his innocence. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, the trial Court had delivered the Judgment convicting the accused as aforesaid. Hence, this appeal.
8. It was urged by the learned counsel for the appellant that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the trial Court has committed a grave error in convicting the accused appellant under Section 10 of the POCSO Act, as the appellant could not have been convicted only on the basis of the sole testimony of the victim. Even considering the prosecution case, as it is, at the best, the case would fall under sexual assault, punishable under Section 8 of the POCSO Act.
9. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that there are lots of contradictions in the statements of the witnesses. The learned trial Court w
Amol Dudhram Barsagade vs. State of Maharashtra
Lallu Manjhi and Another vs. State of Jharkhand
Section 10 of POCSO Act says punishment for aggravated sexual assault
The presumption of guilt under Section 29 of the POCSO Act is rebuttable and requires the prosecution to establish foundational facts before the burden shifts to the accused to prove innocence.
The need for corroboration of evidence, especially in cases involving child witnesses, and the rebuttable nature of the presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act.
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....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the critical appreciation of the victim's testimony in a sexual assault case, the burden of proof on the accused to establish the absence of culpab....
Statutorial presumption u/s 29 and 30 of POCSO Act certainly places a persuasive burden on appellant to show that he does not possess requisite culpable mental state for offence for which he is prose....
In a criminal case, the prosecution bears the burden of proving the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Inconsistencies and contradictions in the prosecution's evidence may affect the relia....
The main legal point established is the significance of the child's testimony in cases of sexual assault, the presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act, and the need for proper protection of the ....
Conviction can be based solely on prosecutrix's evidence, unless there are compelling reasons for seeking corroboration.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.