Back
MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI, BHASKAR RAJ PRADHAN
Binod Tamang – Appellant
Versus
State of Sikkim – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conviction details and context. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments against second fir and victim's age. (Para 2) |
| 3. court's review of prosecution challenges. (Para 3) |
| 4. court's findings on conviction merits. (Para 5 , 13) |
| 5. discussion on victim's consent and evidence. (Para 6 , 10 , 12) |
| 6. probation act application. (Para 14 , 15) |
| 7. final conclusion and order by the court. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
JUDGMENT
Meenakshi Madan Rai, J. - (i). The Appellant, in ST (POCSO) case No. 10 of 2015, State of Sikkim v. Binod Tamang was charged with the offence under Section 3 (a) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short 'POCSO Act'), along with Section 3 76(2)(i) and Section 3 63 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (for short 'IPC').
(ii) Vide the impugned Judgment dated 30-10-2017, he was convicted of the offences under Section 3 (a) of the POCSO Act and Section 3 76(2)(i) of the IPC but acquitted of the offence under Section 3 63 of the IPC. The impugned Order on sentence dated 30-10-2017, directed the Appellant to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand) only, under Section 3 (a) of the POC
The court reaffirmed that consent from a minor is inadmissible in law concerning sexual offenses and emphasized stringent proof requirements for age verification in such cases.
The court emphasized that mere admissibility of evidence does not establish its probative value, particularly when witness testimonies are inconsistent and influenced, raising reasonable doubt regard....
A conviction under the POCSO Act requires corroborative evidence beyond mere victim testimony; failure to prove victim's age and the circumstances surrounding the allegation renders the prosecution c....
The court emphasized that the burden to prove the victim's age lies with the prosecution, which failed to establish it through credible evidence, leading to the acquittal of the appellant.
The prosecution must establish the victim's age as below 18 years and provide corroborating evidence to prove charges under the POCSO Act.
The court clarified that the status of a perpetrator as a public servant does not require them to act in that capacity during the commission of an aggravated sexual assault.
The court held that discrepancies in the victim's testimony and lack of corroborating evidence created reasonable doubt, leading to the appellant's acquittal.
Point of Law : There was failure on the part of the prosecution to establish the essential foundational facts to attract the provision of POCSO Act.
The importance of proving the victim's age and the need for corroboration of the victim's testimony in cases of sexual offences.
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
