The court established that conviction for rape can rely on the sole testimony of the victim if credible, as corroborated by additional evidence, emphasizing the importance of documentary proof for age determination under relevant laws.

JUDGMENT :

M. Zothankhuma, J.

1. Heard Ms. T. Som, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Ms. A. Begum, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent no.1 and Ms. S.Khataniar, learned counsel for the respondent no.2.

2. This is an appeal against the judgment dated 28.07.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, Majuli in Special Case No.47/2023, by which the appellants have been convicted under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012, for raping the victim, who was 15 years old.

3. The prosecution case in brief is that an FIR dated 28.01.2023 was submitted by the informant (PW-1) to the Officer-in-Charge of the Garamur Police Station, to the effect that at around 5 to 6 a.m on 28.01.2023, his sister aged 13 years took the goats to the field. At the same time, the appellants had also taken their cows near the field where his sister had taken their goats. As there was fog at that time, it was not possible to see any one from a distance. Taking advantage of the fog, the accused persons raped his sister. About the same time, PW-6 who was the son of the informant’s father’s elder brother also went to the same place with his cows. PW-6 then witnessed the appellants committing rape, due to which, he raised a hue and cry. The appellants then fled away from the scene. PW-6 rushed back home to inform the family members of the victim. Thereafter, the family members of the victim went to the place of occurrence and rescued the victim, who was admitted in Garamur Civil Hospital. However, doctors therein sent her to Jorhat.

4. Pursuant to the FIR, Garamur P.S. Case No.2/2023 under Section 376-DA IPC read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act was registered.

5. After investigation of the case had been completed and medical examination of the victim had been done, the Investigating Officer (IO) submitted a charge-sheet against the appellants, having found a prima facie case under Section 376-DA IPC read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act against them.

6. The learned Trial Court thereafter framed Charge under Section 6 of the POCSO Act against the appellants, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

7. The learned Trial Court thereafter examined as many as 12 Prosecution Witnesses (PWs) and 3 Defence Witnesses (DWs). After examination of the appellants under Section 313 Cr.P.C, wherein their only explanation to the evidence adduced against them was “I am innocent”, the learned Trial Court came to a finding that the appellants were guilty of having committed the offence of raping the victim. Consequently, the appellants were convicted under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.20,000/- each, in default of fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for 2 (two) months.

8. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that the evidence of the victim who has alleged that she had been gang raped by the appellants cannot be the basis for convicting the appellants. She submits that there being no corroboration of the evidence of the victim by any other witnesses, the conviction of the appellants by the learned Trial Court on the sole evidence of the Prosecutrix is not sustainable. She also submits that the medical examination of the victim by the doctor shows that hymen of the victim had old tears present at 3, 6, 9 O’clock positions. The Medical examination report dated 29.01.2023 having shown that the victim’s hymen was having old tears, there was no proof that the appellants had gang raped the victim the previous day.

9. The Additional Public Prosecutor and the Legal Aid Counsel for the respondent no.2 submit that the stat