Back
MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI, BHASKAR RAJ PRADHAN
Karma Loday Lepcha Alias Kancha – Appellant
Versus
State of Sikkim – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Meenakshi Madan Rai, J. - The only point pressed in Appeal herein is that the Learned Special Judge (POCSO Act, 2012), Gangtok, in the impugned Judgment dated 29-03-2023, in Sessions Trial (POCSO) Case No.48 of 2019, erroneously convicted the Appellant under Section 5(m) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter, 'POCSO Act, 2012') punishable under Section 6 of the same Act, when the Learned Trial Court was seized of the fact that the victim was above twelve years old at the time of the offence as emanates from Paragraph 26 of its Judgment. That, this error is required to be rectified as the records nowhere indicate that the victim was below 12 (twelve) years of age when the offence was perpetrated on her. That, the Birth Certificate of the victim, Exhibit 1, also reveals that her date of birth is 17-03-2003, and her evidence lends credence to this fact as according to her sometime during the year 2016 the first sexual assault took place, pursuant to which she delivered a baby girl on 04-11-2016. Thus, under no circumstance was she under 12 (twelve) years of age at the time of the offence. There is no challenge to the Judgment as regards the
The age of the victim is a critical factor in determining the applicability of specific provisions under the POCSO Act, and misapplication can lead to wrongful convictions.
The prosecution failed to establish the victim's age under POCSO Act, rendering the conviction invalid due to insufficient evidence and procedural errors.
A minor's testimony, corroborated by witnesses, substantiates convictions for sexual assault under the POCSO Act, emphasizing the necessity for strong penalty considerations due to the victim's age.
Point of Law : Prosecution has failed to prove beyond doubt that the victim was below 18 years of age as on the date of the incident. Under these circumstances, the accused cannot be held guilty of o....
Conviction under POCSO Act requires corroboration of testimony, and sentencing can be reduced based on personal circumstances of the offender.
The court held that insufficient evidence for penetrative assault warrants acquittal under specific POCSO sections, yet convicted the appellant for lesser sexual assault under Section 9(n).
The court affirmed that repeated sexual intercourse with a minor under 18 years constitutes an aggravated offense under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, irrespective of consent claims, establishing the ac....
Conviction under the POCSO Act necessitates proof of the victim's minority; failure to establish this must lead to acquittal.
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
