Back
G. S. SANDHAWALIA, VIKAS SURI
Avnish Kumar Sharma @ Avinish – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conviction based on teacher-student relationship and evidence. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. unreliability of victim's testimony and contradictions. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. importance of delay in lodging fir and evidential weight. (Para 6 , 28 , 30) |
| 4. need for corroboration and impact of delay. (Para 29 , 31 , 35) |
| 5. right to benefit of doubt leads to acquittal. (Para 50) |
JUDGMENT
G.S. Sandhawalia, J. - The appellant is aggrieved against the order of conviction passed against him by the learned Addl.Sessions Judge, Jind in FIR No.738 dated 10.09.2013 under Sections 376 (2) (f) (i) IPC and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, 'POCSO Act'). The sentence awarded to the appellant is to the tune of 14 years of rigorous imprisonment and Rs.20,000/- as fine and in default, 2 years of rigorous imprisonment under Section 376(2)(f)(i) and Section 6 of the POCSO Act whereas under Section 506 IPC, it is for a period of 2 years along with Rs.5000/- as fine and default clause is of one year.
2. The victim in the present case is none else but a child in the school and was a student of 11th class where the appellant was teaching as a Maths Teacher. The Tri
Delay in lodging FIR and discrepancies in victim's testimony raise doubts; conviction cannot stand on sole basis of victim's statement without corroborative evidence.
Rape conviction quashed due to unreliable victim testimony with inconsistencies and improvements, manipulated age records doubting minority, absent medical evidence despite multiple claims, unexplain....
The reliability of the victim's testimony, corroborative evidence, and the legal provisions of the POCSO Act were crucial in establishing the guilt of the appellant.
The court affirmed that the testimony of a child victim, supported by medical evidence, is sufficient for conviction under the POCSO Act, even in the presence of a negative DNA report regarding pater....
The testimony of a minor victim in sexual assault cases is sufficient for conviction if it inspires confidence, without the need for corroboration.
The prosecution failed to prove the victim's age and the occurrence of the alleged incident beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the appellant's acquittal.
The prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt; inconsistencies in testimony and delay in reporting undermine credibility.
(1) Delay – Delay per se cannot be the ground to discard and disbelieve the otherwise credible and trustworthy evidence of the prosecution witness. (2) Delay – If the prosecution is able to prove the....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
