Conviction under the POCSO Act can be affirmed based on the reliability of the victim's testimony and statutory presumptions, even if procedural lapses regarding the cross-examination of witnesses occurred during the trial.

JUDGMENT :

RAJESH KUMAR, J.

By Court

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Spl.P.P. representing the State.

2. The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction dated 07.02.2019 and order of sentence dated 13.02.2019 passed in POCSO Case No. 16 of 2017 arising out of Angara P.S. Case No. 119 of 2016 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 7043 of 2016 by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XVIII cum Special Judge, POCSO, Ranchi, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 366, 354 of the IPC and Section 8 of the POCSO Act and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 years with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and a default sentence of R.I. for 6 months under Section 366 IPC and further R.I. for 3 years with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and a default sentence of R.I. for 6 months under Section 8 of the POCSO Act. No separate sentence under Section 354 of the IPC has been passed in view of Section 42 of the POCSO Act.

3. The criminal law has been put into motion on lodging an F.I.R being Angara P.S. Case No. 119 of 2016 by the informant namely Sawan Birhor before the Officer-In-charge, Angara Police Station on 14.12.2024.

The brief story as per the prosecution is that on 08.12.2016 the minor sister of the informant aged about 12 years had gone to SBI Gondali Pokhar Branch for withdrawal of money, but on the way the above-named accused kidnapped her and took her to Patna. It is further alleged that when the informant had a telephonic conversation with the accused, the accused has disclosed that the victim had gone with him out of her own will and she will be returning on 12.12.2016 but when she did not return, the case has been instituted.

4. On the basis of the written report, case was registered as Angara P.S. Case No. 119 of 2016 for the offence punishable under Section 366A of the IPC against the accused – appellant.

5. On the basis of the investigation, the Police has submitted the chargesheet against the appellant and thereafter cognizance has been taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions.

6. Accordingly, the charge under Sections 366 & 354 of the IPC and Section 8 of the POCSO Act, 2012 was framed, which was explained to the appellant to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

7. To substantiate the prosecution story altogether six prosecution witnesses have been examined. Their brief statements are as follows:

I. P.W.1(Victim) – She has stated that in the month of December, 2016 at about. 2/2:30 P.M. when she had gone to Gundali Pokhar Bank then on way the accused forcibly pulled her on a Auto Rickshaw and taken to Khadgarha Bus Station and thereafter theymoved to Patna and kept under his captivity. It is also deposed that while staying at Patna the accused person used to keep her at several Brick Kiln and also molested her. she was medically examined by a lady doctor and thereafter brought to Court where her statement was recorded by the Magistrate. She has also stated that her date of birth as recorded in the School Register is 01.03.2004. During cross examination she has stated that while boarding the Tempo she did not raise any alarm because except accused person and driver there was no one present.

II. P.W.2(Pushpa Devi) – She is the mother of the victim. She was not cross examined by the defence counsel though opportunity was provided. The accused person was also asked to have services of legal aid panel advocate but he denied, hence under the given circumstances the said witness was discharged.

III. P.W.3(Sawan Birhor) – He is the informant of the c