The testimony of a child witness can be relied upon if corroborated by other evidence, and the presence of support persons does not imply tutoring.

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Kainthla, J.

The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 03.12.2019 passed by learned Special Judge, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P. (learned Trial Court) vide which the respondent (accused before the learned Trial Court) was convicted of the commission of offences punishable under Sections 354-A of the Indian Penal Code (for short “IPC”), and Sections 8, 10 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012(for short, “POCSO Act”) and order dated 04.12.2019, vide which he was sentenced as under:-

(The parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience).

2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the police presented a challan against the accused before the learned Trial Court for the commission of offences punishable under Section 354-A of IPC and Sections 8, 10 and 12 of the POCSO Act. It was asserted that the accused was posted as JBT in Government Primary School. He showed obscene videos to the female students of class 4 on 17.09.2018 and molested them. The matter was reported to Rasalu Ram (PW-8). He immediately asked Desh Raj Rana (PW-13) to conduct an inquiry and submit a report. Desh Raj Rana (PW-13) went to the school. He called the victim, her relatives and Duni Chand (PW-14), another teacher. Duni Chand (PW-14) recorded the statements of the victim (Ext.PW-8/A), her father (Ext.PW-8/B) and the accused (Ext.PW-13/B). He sent these statements with his report(Ext.PW-13/A). Rasalu Ram (PW-8) made a written complaint (Ext.PW-8/E) to the police. F.I.R. (Ext.PW19/A) was registered at the Police Station. Inspector Mahinder Singh (PW-19) conducted the investigation. He visited the spot, prepared the site plan (Ext.PW-19/C) and recorded the statement of witnesses as per their version. He arrested the accused vide memo (Ext.PW-19/D). He seized the mobile phone of the accused (Ext.P-2) vide memo (Ext.PW-11/B). He put the mobile phone in a cloth parcel and sealed the parcel with five impressions of seal 'K'. He filed an application (Ex. PW-19/E) for recording the statement of the victim. The victim’s statement (Ex. PW-2/B) was recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. It was also video recorded, and the video recording was transferred to the memory card (Ext.PW-19/G). The victim was sent for a medical examination; however, her father refused to get her medically examined. MLC (Ext. PW-19/J) was issued. Inspector Mohinder Singh (PW-19) filed an application (Ext.PW-19/K) to obtain the record. He obtained the letter (Ext.PW-19/L) and copy of the service book (Ext.PW-19/M) from the Block Elementary Office. He filed an application before Secretary Gram Panchayat. Mukesh Kumar (PW-12) issued the birth certificate of the victim (Ext.PW-12/B), showing that she was born on 05.03.2010. The mobile phone was sent to RFSL, NR, Dharamshala. Dr Minakshi Mahajan (PW-23) examined the mobile phone of the accused and issued a report (Ext-PX) stating that no porn video was found in it but found the audio file and images of Sapna, the dancer, were present in it. The police also filed an application for (Ext.PW-12/C) to obtain the birth record. Mukesh Kumar (PW-12) issued a birth record(Ext.PW-12/D) and age certificate (Ext.PW-12/E). Inspector Mahinder Singh (PW-19) filed an application (Ex. PW-9/A) for obtaining the date of birth of the victim from the school. Khem Singh (PW-9) issued the date of birth certificate of the victim (Ext.PW-9/B), the abstract of teacher attendance register (Ext.PW-9/C), the abstract of admission re