The court established that a victim's age and the nature of consent are critical in determining liability for sexual offenses, emphasizing the importance of conclusive evidence.

JUDGMENT

Sandeep Mehta, J. - The appellant herein has been convicted and sentenced as below vide judgment dated 27.6.2019 passed by the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, 2012 and Child Rights Protection Commission Act 2005, No.1, Udaipur in Special Sessions Case No.117/2018:

2. Being aggrieved of his conviction and sentences, the appellant has preferred the instant appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C.

3. Briefly stated facts relevant and essential for disposal of the appeals are noted hereinbelow:-

4. Jhamku (P.W.10) submitted a written report (Ex.P17) to the S.H.O. P.S. Nai, District Udaipur on 27.10.2015 alleging inter-alia that she had gone out to the Avari Mata Temple on 24.10.2015 with her family members. Her younger daughter Sushri P (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the victim') aged 16 years and her son Shankar were present at home. She returned on 25.10.2015 and found that Mst.P was missing. She asked her son as to the whereabouts of the girl on which he replied that he had gone to work leaving his sister at home and that he had no idea about her whereabouts. She made enquiries in the neighbourhood but could not gather any information regarding the bearings of her daughter. She apprehended that some unknown person had lured Mst.P and kidnapped her with the intention of marrying her. On the basis of this report, FIR No.214/2015 (Ex.P18) came to be registered at the Police Station Nai for the offences under Sections 363 and 366 IPC. Investigation was commenced. The girl was traced out after about two months and her custody was handed over to the first informant Smt.Jhamku vide memorandum (Ex.P4). The Investigating Officer requisitioned the school documents of the girl for determination of age and accordingly, the Principal of the Govt. Primary School, Kodiyal provided him the copies of the transfer certificate and the scholar register, wherein the date of birth of the girl was recorded as 29.7.2000. On the basis of the date of birth as entered in the school record, the girl was treated to be a minor and was from Scheduled Caste category. As, she levelled allegation of sexual assault against the appellant in her statements recorded during investigation, the offences punishable under Sections 376 IPC and Section 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act as well as Section 3(5)(xii) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act were applied to the case.

5. The appellant was apprehended and after conducting usual investigation, a charge-sheet came to be filed against him in the court of the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases, Udaipur for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC, Section 4 of the POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The case was then transferred to the court of the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases cum Child Rights Protection Commission Act 2005, Court No.1, Udaipur for trial where, charges were framed against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 363 and 366 IPC, Section 6 of POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. He pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution examined as many as 16 witnesses and exhibited 18 documents to prove its case. Upon conclusion of the prosecution evidence, the accused was questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and was confronted with the circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution case which he denied and claimed to be innocent. Upon hearing the arguments advanced by the learned

6. Public Prosecutor and the defence counsel and appreciating the evidence availa