Cho Mingur Lepcha vs State of Sikkim

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(Sikk) 66

MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI, BHASKAR RAJ PRADHAN
Cho Mingur Lepcha – Appellant
Versus
State of Sikkim – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Jorgay Namka, Advocate (Legal Aid Counsel), for the Appellant; Mr. S. K. Chettri, Additional Public Prosecutor with Ms. Pema Bhutia, Assistant Public Prosecutor, , for the State-Respondent

JUDGMENT

Meenakshi Madan Rai, J. - Whether the Appellant was the perpetrator of the offence of rape, is what this Court is required to determine in the instant matter.

2. Before delving into a discussion on this aspect, the facts of the case are briefly being traversed. On 10.05.2020, P.W.2 lodged a Complaint, Exhibit 4, of the same date, before the Mangan Police Station informing therein that the Victim, his sister, aged about 12 years at the time of the incident had been impregnated by the Appellant. That, he had been informed of this fact by P.W.3, the Accredited Social Health Activist (ASHA) of the area. Based on Exhibit 4, the Mangan Police Station registered FIR Case No.07(05)2020, dated 10.05.2020, under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, the “POCSO Act”), against the Appellant, following which the I.O., P.W.17 took up the matter for investigation. On completion of investigation, finding prima facie case under Section 376 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (for short, the “IPC”) read with Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act, Charge-Sheet was accordingly submitted against the Appellant.

3. Before the Learned Trial Court, the Appellant p