The conviction for sexual offences against children can rely on the sole testimony of child victims if credible and corroborated by additional evidence.

JUDGMENT :

Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J.

The appellant-Kapil Kumar has been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years for the commission of offence punishable under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short the POCSO Act) and to pay a fine of Rs. 25,000/- and in default of payment of fine, he was further directed to undergo imprisonment of similar description for a period of one year. He was further sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years for the offence punishable under Section 506 of IPC and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in case of default of payment of fine he was further directed to undergo imprisonment of similar description for a peHriod of one month. Both the sentences were ordered to be run concurrently.

2. Brief facts of the prosecuftion case are that on 20.03.2014 at about 11:30 a.m. Child Line Solan gave a secret information to Police Station, Kandaghat on telephone and requested that police officer be sent to GPS Silhari for recording the statement of complainant.

3. On this information, police visited the spot and recorded Cstatement of complainant master “PA” (name withheld) under Section 154 Cr.P.C. The complainant narrated that he was a student of 4th standard in Government Primary School, Silhari, gand his father was running a Rehri for selling “Chole-Kulche”. His mother was not living with them. A person named Sachida Nand @ Pandit uncle who was doing the work of plumber used to visit their house in the evening and when his father went to sleep, the Pandit uncle used to sexually abuse the complainant “PA” and his sister victim “PY” (name withheld). Complainant alleged that the said Pandit uncle used to put his finger in the anus of complainant and used to take the victim and his sister to his house where they were again sexually abused by the Pandit uncle by putting his penis into vagina of “PY” and anus of “PY” and “PA”. This act was repeatedly committed by Pandit uncle. On the day of Holi, the said Pandit uncle again came to their house and while sleeping in the night, he put his fingHer into the anus of complainant. This fact was disclosed by complainant to one Ranjeet who apprised the father of the fcomplainant. Due to this Ranjeet and father of complainant had beaten Pandit uncle. Complainant also alleged that one another person named Kapil, who was doing the work rof cleaning of bathroom and toilet at Kandaghat, used to take the complainant and his sister behind the bushes where he sexually assaulted them by putting his penis intoC the vagina of “PY”. He also used to lick the private part of “PY” and also give Rs. 20/- to each of the victims. Pandit uncle also used to pay Rs. 10/- to each of the victims. Pandit guncle and Kapil used to threaten the victims not to disclose these facts to anyone.

4. On the basis of the statement of complainant victim, FIR under Sections 376 , 377, 506 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (IPC) and under Section 4 of the POCSO Act was registered.

5. The police initiated investigation and medical examinations of victim “PA” and victim “PY” were got conducted at Civil Hospital Kandaghat and thereafter at IGMC Shimla. Spot map was prepared. Police took into possession a shawl, a bottle of oil, pieces of cloth, wrapper of Nirodh and wrapper of Everyday Milk from the spot which were identified by the complainant.

6. Statement of witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. were recorded. The victims were produced before the Judicial Magistrate w