The testimony of a minor victim in sexual assault cases is reliable and sufficient for conviction, even with minor inconsistencies in details.

JUDGMENT :

YARENJUNGLA LONGKUMER, J.

This is a criminal appeal from Jail under Section 383 Cr.PC against the judgment and order dated 08.02.2024 and sentence order dated 22.02.2024 passed by the Special Judge, POCSO Act Aizawl Judicial District, Aizawl in S.C.No.78/2020 in criminal Trial No.1239/2020 arising out of All Women Police Station Case No. 27/2020 under section 376(3) IPC R/W section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012.

2. By the impugned order and judgment dated 08.02.2024 and sentence order dated 22.02.2024, the accused/appellant has been convicted for the offence under section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and he has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/-, with a default clause to undergo another 6(six) months simple imprisonment.

3. The First Information Report (FIR) was lodged before the Officer-in- Charge All Women Police Station Aizawl district on 03.09.2020 by one Ramthanliani/informant/PW-1. In the FIR it was stated that the daughter of the informant aged about 15 years was raped by her father/accused at his residence in Ratu village during July 2019. It was stated that the accused/appellant raped the victim on numerous occasions even after that and the last incident took place on 03.07.2020. The informant also stated that the FIR was submitted late as her daughter/victim revealed the incident only on 31.08.2020. On receipt of the FIR, a case was registered being All Women P.S. Case No.27/2020 under section 376(3) IPC R/W section 6 POCSO Act,2012.

4. During the course of investigation, the complainant along with other witnesses and the victim were examined by the investigating agency. The statement of the victim under section 164 Cr.PC was also recorded and the I.O of the case/PW-10 submitted a charge-sheet under section 173 Cr.PC vide charge-sheet No.35/2020 dated 29.10.2020 having found a prima facie case for the offence under section 376(3) IPC R/W section 6 POCSO Act,2012 against the appellant/accused.

5. The appellant/accused was produced before the learned Special Judge POCSO on 07.12.2020. The Court also appointed State defense counsel to conduct the case for the accused/appellant as he expressed his inability to engage a counsel to defend his case. On 07.12.2020 upon hearing the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned State Defense counsel and upon perusal of the materials on record, the learned Trial Court proceeded to frame the charge under section 376(3) IPC R/W section 6 of the POCSO Act against the accused/appellant.

6. After framing the charge, the charge was read over and explained to the appellant to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. During the course of the trial, the prosecution examined 10 witnesses and exhibited 9 documents.

7. After closure of evidence from the prosecution side, the appellant/accused was examined under section 313 Cr.PC. The plea of the appellant in reply to the questions put to him under section 313 Cr.PC was of denial. During the section 313 Cr.PC examination, the accused stated that the case was filed because his ex-wife was angry with him. The accused appellant also examined himself as DW-1. In his examination-in-chief the appellant accused stated that in 2015 he was arrested by the Police because his wife had alleged that he tried to get sexual gratification from his daughter. The matter was taken up in the Police station and after 3 days of deliberations it was determined that he was innocent of the allegation. As he could not continue to live together as husband and wife after the allega