Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
MARLI VANKUNG, SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA
Rengsibula S/o Zathianga(L) – Appellant
Versus
State of Mizoram – Respondent
JUDGMENT AND ORDER :
(Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, J.)
Heard Mr. T. Lalzekima, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mrs. Linda L. Fambawl, learned Public Prosecutor for the State respondent and Mrs. Emily. L. Chhangte, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the respondent No.2
2. This appeal is directed against the Final Judgment dated 19.12.2024, passed by the Court of the Learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court (Rape and Protection of Children from Sexual Offence) Act, Aizwal in Sessions case No. 30/2022 arising out of Crl. Trial No. 424/2022 with reference to All Women P.S. Case No. 5/2022 convicting the Accused/Appellant under Section 12 ,10 and 6 of the Projection of Children from Sexual offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as “POCSO Act”).
3. A written complaint was lodged by the informant stating that her younger sister ‘X’ who stayed with her step father/accused/appellant from August, 2012 to June, 2013 was subjected to sexual intercourse by the accused appellant several times, at his residence at Melthum when the victim was only nine years of age.
4. Upon receipt of the F.I.R, All Women P.S. Case No. 05/2022 was registered under Section 6 of the POCSO Act r/w Section 376
A trial court must follow procedural laws and provide cogent reasoning in judgments, especially in serious criminal cases, or risk a miscarriage of justice.
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 court affirmed that procedural irregularities do not invalidate convictions if no prejudice is shown, emphasizing the trial court's discretion in adding charges.
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 conviction under the POCSO Act was upheld amidst witness discrepancies, highlighting the importance of victim's consistent testimony; sentence was modified to five years for proportionality based....
The court upheld the conviction for aggravated penetrative sexual assault based on the victim's credible testimony, emphasizing that minor discrepancies do not undermine the overall reliability of he....
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....
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.
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.
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
