The prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, particularly in cases where the victim's statements are inconsistent and unsupported by corroborative evidence.

JUDGMENT :

SASHIKANTA MISHRA, J.

The appellant questions the correctness of the judgment passed by learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Nayagarh on 17.11.2016 whereby he was convicted for the offence under Sections 363 and 376 of IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act and further was sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo R.I. for period of fifteen days for commission of the offence under Section 363 of ; R.I. for ten years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to undergo R.I. for one month for the offence under Section 6 of the POCSO Act. No separate sentence was passed for the offence under Section 376 of in view of the sentence passed under Section 6 of the POCSO Act. It was further directed that the sentences as above shall run concurrently.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is as follows:

The accused appellant used to reside in his maternal uncle's house at village Champatipur who had a sugarcane crushing unit. The victim used to visit the said crushing unit with her father at times and met the accused there. One day, when the victim had been to attend call of nature, the accused caught hold of her hand and when the victim raised hulla, he left her. On the next day, around 12 O'clock the victim had been to the crusher unit to crush sugarcane. The accused proposed to marry her and elope with her. The victim did not agree and returned home. On the next day, she accompanied her elder sister with the intention of purchasing medicines at Itamati. The elder sister of the victim was a student of Itamati College who asked her to purchase the medicines and return home. Later, when the elder sister returned home, she did not find the victim for which she searched for her in the Itamati market by inquiring from different shopkeepers. Since the victim was unable to be traced out, the mother of the victim went to the police station and lodged a report. Four days later, the victim's mother came to know from the maternal uncle of the accused that he had taken her to Bhubaneswar, whereupon the matter was informed to police. On the next day, the parents of the victim went to Bhubaneswar along with police, where they rescued the victim and the accused was arrested. The report before the police is said to have been lodged on 29.12.2014 leading to registration of Itamati P.S. Case No.117 of 2014 under Section 363 of IPC . Upon completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted against the accused under Sections 363 /376/323/506 of read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

3. The defence plea, apart from denial was, the victim was in love with the accused and that she had voluntarily accompanied him to Bhubaneswar where she stayed for two weeks and that a false case of kidnapping was subsequently instituted.

4. To prove its case, prosecution examined eight witnesses and exhibited six documents. Defence did not lead any evidence, either oral or documentary.

5. Learned court below considered the oral evidence on record in detail. After analyzing the evidence of the victim (P.W.3), her elder sister (P.W.1) and her mother (P.W.2), learned court below found that the victim had been to Bhubaneswar with the accused voluntarily by boarding a bus and had sexual intercourse with the accused with her consent. Such finding was rendered considering the fact that had it been a case of kidnapping, the victim would have protested or shouted for help while travelling in a bus full of passengers. Therefore, from the conduct of the victim, learned court below held that she had voluntarily moved with the accused and had sexual intercourse with him with her consent. Learned court below held that the victim being