2022 Supreme(Sikk) 45
HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM
Meenakshi Madan Rai, J.
Deo Kumar Subba - Appellant
Versus
State of Sikkim - Respondent
Crl. A. No. 09 of 2021
Decided On : 23-11-2022
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Sexual Offenses
Act Referred
EVIDENCE ACT: S.65, S.64
INDIAN PENAL CODE: S.341, S.511, S.448, S.451, S.342, S.354, S.354(d), S.354(d)(1)(i), S.376
PROTECTION OF CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT: S.8, S.9
Headnote
Facts of the case:
The Appellant was charged with sexual assault against a minor, resulting in multiple convictions. Key evidence included the victim’s testimony and witness corroborations, established through cross-examination.
Findings of Court:
The conviction under the relevant sections was deemed appropriate with the sentences to run concurrently; all evidence supported the prosecution's case against the Appellant.
Issues: The primary issue was whether the evidence substantiated the Appellant's conviction for sexual assault against the minor victim.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court reasoned that the consistent testimonies from the victim and witnesses demonstrated the Appellant's guilt, confirming that the evidentiary standards were met despite challenges regarding the victim's age documentation.
Result: Appeal dismissed; conviction upheld.
Ms. Gita Bista, Advocate (Legal Aid Counsel)., for the Appellant; Mr. Thinlay Dorjee Bhutia, Additional Public Prosecutor., for the State-Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to prosecution evidence and victim's age. (Para 4 , 7) |
| 2. court's reasoning on evidence sufficiency. (Para 5 , 6 , 8) |
| 3. affirmation of trial court's findings. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 4. conclusion of the appeal. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
JUDGMENT
Meenakshi Madan Rai, J. - Aggrieved with the Judgment and Order on Sentence in Sessions Trial (POCSO) Case No.02 of 2018, dated 30-06-2021, the Appellant assails both.
2(i). The Prosecution case arose on the basis of Exhibit 3, the First Information Report (hereinafter, the 'FIR'), lodged by P.W 2, the father of the victim on 01-08-2017, before the Sadar Police Station, Gangtok, informing therein inter alia that he lives with his two daughters aged about fourteen and nine years. That, the Appellant is his neighbour. On 31-07-2017, at about 5 p.m when the victim P.W 1 had gone to the house of P.W 8 for an errand, the Appellant came to the courtyard of the house of P.W 8, caught hold of the victim and molested her by groping at her breasts. On the following day, 01-08-2017, he followed P.W 1 to school and at lunch time he sent a student to call her to the school's lower gate, where, he again caught hold of her arms, gave her Rs.40/- (forty) forcibly and attempted to molest her. On both the above occasions she managed to free herself. That, the same evening when P.W 1 reached home after school and entered her home, the Appellant also forcibly entered and tried to rape her. That, P.W 1 was alone at home at that time as P.W 2 was at work and his younger daughter was still at school. The victim managed to escape and ran towards the house of P.W 8 where she sought for help. She also narrated the incident to P.W 3, the younger brother of P.W 8. Assuming that the Appellant had left, she returned home but found him hiding near her house. On noticing P.W 1 entering her house, he also forced entry into her house, molested her and attempted to rape her. At that time, P.W 2 had called P.W 1 on her cell phone to enquire whether she had reached home, whereupon she narrated the entire incident to him. P.W 2 rushed home and found the Appellant who appeared to be inebriated, in the courtyard. Accordingly, P.W 2 lodged Exhibit 3.
(ii) Investigation into the matter by P.W 15, Sub-Inspector of Police, to whom the matter was endorsed, revealed that the Appellant had committed the offence as alleged in Exhibit 3. P.W 15 submitted Charge-Sheet against the Appellant under Sections 376 /511/354(D)/342/448 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (hereinafter, the 'IPC'), read with Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter the 'POCSO' Act). On receipt of the Charge-Sheet, the Learned Trial Court framed charge against the Appellant under Section 9 (l) of the POCSO Act and Sections 354 D(1)(i), 451, 341, and 342 of the IPC.
3(i). The Appellant entered a plea of 'not guilty' and sought trial. Fifteen prosecution witnesses were examined following which the Appellant was examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter, the 'Cr.P.C') where he denied the incidents. He sought to and was permitted to examine three witnesses. The Judgment and Order on Sentence followed, whereby the Learned Trial Court, convicted the Appellant under Section 9 (l) of the POCSO Act and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand) only, in default thereof, to undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of six months under Section 10 of the same Act. He was also sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years under Section 354 D(1)(i)/(2) of IPC with fine of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand) only, and default clause of imprisonment. He was further sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years with fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only, under Section 451 of the IPC with default clause of imprisonment. The Sentences were ordered to run co