The testimony of a minor victim in a sexual assault case is highly reliable, and corroborated evidence from family and medical reports can uphold convictions despite missing forensic analysis.

JUDGMENT :

S. K. SAHOO, J.

1. The appellant Sisira Pradhan faced trial in the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Phulbani in G.R. No. 48 of 2014/T.R. No. 23 of 2014 for the offences punishable under sections 376/506 of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereafter for short ‘POCSO Act’).

The learned trial Court vide impugned judgment and order dated 03.03.2016 found the appellant guilty under sections 376(2)(i)/506 of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 of the POCSO Act and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for twelve years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- (rupees five hundred), in default of payment of fine to undergo further R.I. for a period of two months for the offence under section 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code and to undergo R.I. for one year for the offence under section 506 of the Indian Penal Code and both the sentences were directed to concurrently and no separate sentence has been imposed by the learned trial Court for the offence under section 4 of the POCSO Act in view of section 42 of the said Act by the learned Sessions Judge, Phulbani.

2. The prosecution case, in short, as per the first information report lodged by the victim ‘LD’ on 12.08.2014 before the officer in-charge of Sarangada police station is that on 11.08.2014 at about 10.00 a.m. while she was sleeping in her house and her parents had been to the house of her neighbour for watching television, at that time finding her alone, the appellant Sisir Pradhan entered inside her house, gagged her mouth, opened her pant and committed rape on her. When the parents of the victim arrived at the scene of occurrence, the appellant fled away giving threat to the family members with dire consequences. On the basis of such written report, Sarangada P.S. Case No. 58 of 2014 was registered on 12.08.2014 under sections 376/506 of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 of the POCSO Act.

P.W.6 Radhakanta Sahu, who was the officer in-charge of Sarangada police station after registration of the case, took up investigation and during the course of investigation, he examined the informant and other witnesses, visited the spot, prepared the spot map Ext.9, arrested the appellant on 12.08.2014, seized the wearing apparels of the appellant as per seizure list Ext.5, sent the victim to Firingia C.H.C. for medical examination on 12.08.2014 and on the same day the wearing apparels of the victim were seized as per seizure list Ext.3. The I.O. made a prayer to the learned Special Judge, Phulbani for sending the seized exhibits to S.F.S.L., Rasulgarh, Bhubaneswar for chemical examination on 13.08.2014. The I.O. then forwarded the appellant to the Court on 13.08.2014. During course of investigation, the I.O. visited the school of the victim and seized the school admission register on production by the Headmaster as per the seizure list Ext.6 and left the same in the zima of the headmaster as per zimanama Ext.7. The I.O. prayed for recording of the 164 Cr.P.C. statement of the victim and accordingly, the same was recorded. The I.O. received the medical examination report of the victim so also that of the appellant and on completion of investigation, submitted charge sheet against the appellant on 26.08.2014 under sections 376/506 of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 of the POCSO Act.

4. During course of trial, in order to prove its case, the prosecution examined seven witnesses.

P.W.1 ‘LD’ is the victim, who is the informant in the case and she supported the prosecution case.

P.W.2 Manasi Digal is the mother of the victim and she stated that on the date of occurrence, she along with her husband had been to the neighbour’s house to watch television and at about 10.00 p.m. th