Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) AIZAWL BENCH : AIZAWL
SHAMIMA JAHAN
Vanlalruata – Appellant
Versus
State of Mizoram – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Shamima Jahan, J.
Heard Mr. Joseph L Renthlei, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the appellant, Ms. Linda L Fambawl, learned Public Prosecutor for the State of Mizoram and Mr. C Tlanthianghlima, Legal Aid Counsel appearing for the informant.
1. This is a criminal appeal filed from Jail under Section 383 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, against the Judgment & Order dated 17.11.2021 passed by the Fast Track Court, Kolasib District, in Sessions Case(K) No. 12 of 2019, under Section 376(2)(f) IPC read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (here-in-after shortly referred to as “the POCSO Act”).
BASIC FACTS
2. The prosecution story as unfolded is that the FIR was lodged by the informant stating inter alia that the victim, 8 years of age, complained of some pain in her private part during June, 2018 and when the informant asked her the reason as to why she was experiencing pain, she did not answer and as such, the informant took her to the Doctor and when the Doctor asked as to whether anyone had touched her private part, she at first did not reveal anything but on being forced, she finally told that her neighbor i.e. the appellant has
A conviction under the POCSO Act requires a formal charge; without it, any judgment rendered is erroneous. Proper examination procedures for the accused must be observed to ensure a fair trial.
The consistent testimony of a minor victim, under the POCSO Act, can solely establish guilt even amidst minor discrepancies, highlighting the importance of reliability in such cases.
The trial court's failure to specify the charge under Section 4(1) or 4(2) of the POCSO Act resulted in an improper conviction and sentence, necessitating a remand for proper proceedings.
Procedural lapses do not invalidate a conviction under the POCSO Act if the testimony of minor witnesses is credible and no demonstrable prejudice occurred to the accused.
Conviction under POCSO Act modified from Section 6 to Section 10 due to evidentiary inconsistencies regarding penetration and charge alteration procedures impacting the defense.
The conviction under Section 6 of the POCSO Act was overturned due to discrepancies in the victim's testimony and lack of evidence proving the appellant's direct involvement in the alleged acts.
The need for strong, compelling, and reliable evidence to prove the guilt of the accused in a criminal case, and the distinction between the trial of Sessions case and the trial held before the Judic....
Evidence of victim child cannot be sole basis for convicting accused unless safeguards are undertaken.
Conviction of the appellant for attempted aggravated penetrative sexual assault upheld based on consistent testimony of the minor victim, despite charge framing errors; sentence reduced to ten years'....
The court affirmed that procedural irregularities do not invalidate convictions if no prejudice is shown, emphasizing the trial court's discretion in adding charges.
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
