The court upheld the conviction under sexual assault laws despite challenges regarding the victim's age, emphasizing the credibility of the victim's testimony.

ORDER :

IA No.11519 of 2024

1. The said instant interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of the appellant for suspension of sentence in connection with POCSO Case No.03 of 2021 corresponding to Murhu P.S. Case No. 122 of 2020 against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 03.12.2022 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Khunti, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been convicted under 452, 323, 341, 354, 376, 504, 506/34 of the IPC, 1860 and under Section 4/6 of POCSO Act and sentenced the appellant to undergo R.I. for three years for offence under Section 452 IPC along with fine of Rs.10,000/-. The appellant was further sentenced to undergo imprisonment for six-six months each for the offences under Section 323, 504 and 506 of IPC. The appellant was further sentenced to undergo imprisonment for one month for offence under Section 341 IPC. The appellant was further sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years along with fine of Rs.10,000/- for offence under Section 354 IPC. The appellant was further sentenced to undergo R.I. for twenty years along with fine of Rs.10,000/- for offence under Section 6 of POCSO Act and in default of payment of fines, the appellant was further sentenced to undergo imprisonment for one years for each fine awarded and further be pleased to enlarge the appellant on bail on furnishing surety/sureties to the satisfaction of the Hon’ble Court during the pendency of the present criminal appeal.

2. It has been submitted on behalf of the appellant that it is a case where the appellant has falsely been implicated reason being that the testimony of PW-3 itself wherein she has not supported the entire prosecution version. It has been submitted that the version of the PW-3 if taken into consideration in entirety, it will be said to be a case of consensual relationship. It has further been submitted that age of the victim has not conclusively been proved so far as the juvenility of the victim is concerned and as such since it is a case of consensual relationship, hence the entire prosecution version itself is doubtful and in that view of the matter, the appellant deserves to be released on bail after suspension of sentence.

3. While on the other hand, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail on the ground that the PW-3 has fully supported the prosecution version. It has been submitted that even accepting the version of the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant that there is no conclusive finding regarding the age of the victim as per the statutory mandate as provided under Section 94 of the J.J. Act but even then the conviction since is based upon Section 376 of the IPC and if the testimony of PW-3 will be taken into consideration in entirety then it would be evident that the victim has been subjected to physical relationship repeatedly and due to fear, she had not disclosed the same thing which does not mean that the repeated physical relationship will amount to consensual relationship. Learned counsel for the State based upon the aforesaid ground has submitted that it is therefore not a fit case for suspension of sentence.

4. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone across the findings recorded by learned trial Court in the impugned judgment passed as also the testimony of the witnesses as available in the Lower Court Record and report of the doctor who has been examined as PW-2.

5. This Court has considered the testimony of PW-3 where from it is evident that the victim has supported the prosecution version by deposing that she was subjected to sexual relationship with coercion and due to the fear, she even has left out her study. It has further come in the testimony of PW-3, the victim that the appellant used to threaten that if the occurrence will be reported to anybody she will face the dire consequence even the death and setting her residence on fire.

6. The question of the age has been