Victim testimony must be corroborated; reliance solely on unverified accounts is insufficient for conviction under POCSO.

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Kainthla, J.

1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 24.03.2021, passed by the learned Special Judge, Fast Track Special Court, Kangra at Dharamshala, vide which the appellant (accused before the learned Trial Court) was convicted of the commission of an offence punishable under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (in short ‘POCSO Act’) and order dated 25.03.2021, vide which he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for six months. (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 for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 363 , 366, 368, 376, 323, 506, 120B of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (in short ‘IPC’) and Sections 4 , 6, 17 of the POCSO Act. It was asserted that the informant made a complaint (Ext. PW2/A) asserting that the victim (name being withheld to protect her identity) was aged 16 years. She left her home on 16.06.2014 by saying that she was going to the home of her maternal uncle located at Charri. The informant’s mother visited his house on 18.06.2014 and told him that the victim had not reached the house of her maternal uncle. Her room was searched and it was found that she had not taken any articles with her. Three mobile numbers were found to have been recorded in the documents. These numbers were called but they were found to be switched off. The efforts were made to trace the victim but she could not be found anywhere. Hence, a complaint (Ext. PW2/A) was made to the police. FIR (Ext. PW9/A)was registered in the Police Station. Inspector Negi Ram (PW20) conducted the investigation. He visited the spot and prepared the spot map (Ext. PW20/A). He filed an application (PW1/A) to obtain the birth certificate of the victim. Smt. Archana Chattani (PW1) issued the birth certificate (Ext. PW1/B) and the abstract of the birth register (Ext. PW1/C) showing that the victim was born on 11.06.1999. The house of the accused-Nasib Kumar was searched on 25.06.2014 and the victim was recovered from his house. Memo (Ext. PW2/B) was prepared. A spot Map showing the place of recovery (Ext. PW20/B) was prepared by Inspector Negi Ram. He brought the victim to the Women's Police Station, Dharamshala where her statement was recorded. He filed an application (Ext. PW4/A) for conducting the medical examination of the victim. Dr Shalini Gautam (PW8) conducted her medical examination and found that the possibility of sexual intercourse could not be ruled out. She preserved the samples and handed them over to the police official accompanying the victim. She issued MLC (Ext. PW8/A). The victim was handed over to her father and a memo (Ext. PW2/C) was prepared. The statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. The accused -Ritu produced one mobile phone of the victim (Ext. P1), which was seized vide memo (Ext. PW5/A). The spot map (Ext. PW20/D) was prepared. An application (Ext. PW13/A) was filed for conducting the medical examination of the accused-Nasib Kumar. Dr Harinder Pal Singh (PW13) conducted the medical examination of the accused and found that there was nothing to suggest that he (the accused) was incapable of performing sexual intercourse. He issued the MLC (Ext. PW13/B) and handed over the articles preserved by him to the police official accompanying the accused.