The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the prosecutrix's age and that the sexual encounter was consensual, leading to the acquittal of the accused.

JUDGMENT :

Sureshwar Thakur, J.

The instant appeal is directed against the impugned verdict, as made on 5.8.2022, upon Sessions case bearing No.185-2017, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Fast Track Court (POCSO), Jalandhar wherethrough in respect of charges respectively drawn against the accused qua offences punishable under Sections 363, 366-A, 376, 506 IPC and under Sections 4, 6 and 8 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short ‘the POCSO Act, 2012’), thus the learned trial Judge concerned, proceeded to record a finding of conviction against appellant convict.

2. Moreover, through a separate sentencing order of even date, the learned trial Judge concerned, sentenced the appellant-convict in the hereinafter extracted manner.

3. In addition, under Section 357-A, the victim/prosecutrix became granted Rs.4 Lacs, under the compensation scheme, to be paid by the DLSA, Jalandhar.

4. The same was directed to be disbursed after deducting any other compensation or interim relief already, received by her, under the apposite Scheme. All the above imposed sentences of imprisonment, were ordered to run concurrently but the period of detention undergone by the appellantconvict, during the investigations, and, trial of the case, was, in terms of Section 428 of the Cr.P.C., rather ordered to be set off from the above imposed sentence(s) of imprisonment.

5. The accused-convict becomes aggrieved from the above drawn verdict of conviction, besides also, becomes aggrieved from the consequent thereto sentence(s) of imprisonment, and, of fine as became imposed, upon him, by the learned convicting Court concerned, and, hence has chosen to institute thereagainst the instant criminal appeal.

Factual Background

6. The genesis of the prosecution case, becomes embodied in the appeal FIR, to which Ex.PW4/B is assigned. As per the prosecution case, on 19.01.2017, L/SI Rashpal Kaur was present at Women Cell, Phillaur, where she received a wireless message to reach at Chowki Dhuleta, P.S. Goraya. At this, L/SI Rashpal Kaur reached at Chowki Dhuleta, in civil dress and she along with ASI Harjit Singh No. 494 and PHG Harjinder Singh No. 27024 reached at the house of K son of J. Singh, resident of Village Johal and took the girl T (name is withheld, hereinafter referred to as ‘prosecutrix/victim’) for recording her statement.

7. The victim got recorded her statement to the effect that she is the student of B.Com. 1st Year, studying in GNA University, Hoshiarpur Road, Phagwara. A boy namely, Simranjit Singh @ Simar son of Jaswant Singh used to visit her village often so, she started meeting him. She also used to meet him, on her way to college. He used to say to her that after consulting his parents, he would marry her. On 10.01.2017, at about 9:30 A.M. when she was on her way to college, she met said Simranjit Singh @ Simar, who asked her that he will marry her on that day, as he has already consulted his parents. He asked her that if she loves him, she has to go with him, on that day and they will perform marriage. Then, she went with him, on his allurement. He took her to his house, at village Phalpota. There was no body at home, at that time and he then took her in a room and bolted it from inside. He forced her to make physical relations with him but she told her that before marriage, she will not do so. Despite her resistance, he forcibly made physical relation with her. She started weeping, at that time. Then, he dropped her outside her village, on his bicycle.

8. The victim further alleges, that the accused also threatened him by saying if, she disclosed anything about the incident, he