Back
THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI, K. SEMA
Umakanta Singh S/o Sri Ram Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S.K. Medhi, J.
Both the appeals having arisen from the same judgment and order are considered and heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment and order. While Crl.A./92/2023 is a regular appeal, the other appeal being Crl.A.(J)/65/2024 is preferred from jail. By the impugned judgment and order dated 23.02.2023, the learned Special Judge, Jorhat, passed in Special Case No. 29/2019 under Sections 376/354A/34 IPC read with Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012, convicted the appellants under Section 4 (2) of the POCSO Act, 2012 and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 20 years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) in default of fine to simple imprisonment of 1 year.
2. The criminal law was set into motion by lodging of an Ejahar by PW-1, who is the mother of the victim. It has been stated in the Ejahar, lodged on 11.06.2019, that on 06.06.2019 her minor daughter was raped by the two accused persons. It was alleged that she was shown pornographic videos on the phone. Based on the said Ejahar, the FIR was registered and investigation was done, leading to laying of a charge-sheet. The statement of
The court affirmed the conviction under the POCSO Act based on the victim's credible testimony, emphasizing that minor inconsistencies do not detract from the integrity of her evidence.
The court affirmed the conviction under the POCSO Act, emphasizing the necessity of establishing foundational facts, including the age of victims, and upheld the credibility of victim testimonies des....
The testimony of a child victim is sufficient for conviction in sexual assault cases if credible, even amidst minor discrepancies and delays in FIR filing.
The prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, and any doubt must be resolved in favor of the accused.
The conviction of the appellant was quashed due to insufficient and inconsistent evidence, demonstrating the necessity for reliable testimonies in criminal cases, especially under sexual offence laws....
The prosecution must prove foundational facts beyond reasonable doubt; reliance solely on the victim's testimony is insufficient if unsupported by corroborative evidence.
The delay in lodging the FIR due to pandemic restrictions does not undermine the prosecution's case, and the evidence of child witnesses is credible despite minor discrepancies.
The consistency, coherence, and trustworthiness of the evidence, the application of presumptions under Sections 29 and 30 of the POCSO Act, and the burden of proof on the accused to rebut these presu....
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
