Conviction for sexual assault on a minor can rely on the sole testimony of the victim, established as credible, despite minor discrepancies in narrative and delays in reporting.

JUDGMENT :

Michael Zothankhuma, J.

1. Heard Mrs. H. Lalmalsawmi, learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant. Also heard Mrs. Mary L. Khiangte, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State and Mr. Lalrokunga Pautu, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the respondent No. 2.

2. This is an appeal against the impugned Judgment & Order dated 27.06.2023 passed by the Special Court, POCSO, Lunglei in Criminal Trial No. 87/2022, by which the appellant has been convicted under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 20 (twenty) years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, i/d Simple Imprisonment for 1 (one) month for having sexual intercourse with the 12 year old minor girl.

3. The prosecution case in brief is that an FIR dated 30.01.2022 was submitted by PW-1 stating that her grand-daughter (12 year old) had told her on the night of 29.01.2022 that her step-father (appellant) had sexual intercourse with her ever since she was 11 years old at their house in Lunglei Salem Veng. She therefore prayed to take action against the appellant.

4. In pursuance to the FIR, All Women Police Station Case No. 0/2022 dated 30.01.2022 was registered under Section 6 of the POCSO Act read with Section 376 AB IPC . The Investigating Officer (PW-9) started the investigation and had the victim examined by a Medical Officer. Thereafter, PW-9 sent all the investigation materials that she had collected alongwith the Case Diary to the S.P, Aizawl through the Officer-in-Charge of the All Women Police Station, for transfer of the case to the jurisdictional Police Station, i.e., Lunglei Police Station.

5. The All Women Police Station Case No. 0/2022 dated 30.01.2022 was thus sent to the Lunglei Police Station, wherein the case was re-registered as Lunglei P.S Case No. 21/2022 dated 23.02.2022 under Section 6 of the POCSO Act read with Section 376 AB IPC . The case was then endorsed to the second Investigating Officer (IO), who belonged to the Lunglei Police Station, where the investigation was completed. Charge-sheet was thereafter submitted by the second I.O. of the Lunglei Police Station.

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

7. The learned Trial Court thereafter examined 8 Prosecution Witnesses and 3 Defence Witnesses. After the appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.PC, the learned Trial Court came to a finding that the appellant had committed the offence under Section 5 (m) of the POCSO Act and convicted him accordingly.

8. The evidence of the informant (PW-1) is to the effect that the victim was the illegitimate child of her daughter, i.e. her granddaughter. Further, her daughter’s husband was the step-father of the victim. She stated that the victim stayed with her (PW-1) in Aizawl. When her daughter came to Aizawl during March, 2020, her daughter returned to Lunglei with the victim and the victim stayed with her mother’s family at Lunglei till October, 2021. During the month of October, 2021, the victim telephoned her and requested her to take her back to Aizawl stating that she felt home sick. Accordingly, PW-1 took back the victim from Lunglei to Aizawl. Sometime during the month of January, 2022, the victim told her cousin (PW-5) that the appellant had touched her with sexual intent while she was in Lunglei. The matter came to the knowledge of the victim’ aunt (PW-4), who enquired about the incident from the victim. PW-1 then stated that she saw the victim talking about the incident to PW-4and that she was