IMPORTANT POINT
The judgment reinforces the legal principle that offenses against minors, especially those with mental disabilities, warrant stringent punishment and protection under the law.

JUDGMENT :

Ritu Bahri, C.J.

The present Criminal Appeal has been preferred against the judgement and order dated 10.12.2015 / 11.12.2015 passed by Learned FTC / Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge POCSO, Rudrapur, Udham Singh Nagar in Special Sessions Trial No. 90 of 2015 (New No. 518 of 2015), State vs. Yaseen, whereby accused-appellant Yaseen has been convicted for the offenses punishable under section 376(2) and 366 IPC. In respect of offence punishable under Section 376(2) IPC, the convict was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for the remainder of the natural life along with a fine of Rs.50,000/-, in default of payment of fine, the convict was further directed to undergo six-month simple imprisonment. He has been also convicted under section 366 IPC, and was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years along with a fine of Rs.20,000/-, in default of payment of which, the convict was further directed to undergo three months simple imprisonment. Both the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.

2. Prosecution story, in brief, is that on 26.03.2015, a written complaint was given by the father of the victim to Police Station, Jaspur, to the effect that on 26.03.2015 at around 04:30 pm, the daughter of the complainant, aged about 16 years, who is mentally retarded, ran out of the house. When the complainant’s wife and brother-in-law Mohd. Saeed, who had come to the complainant’s house, went out to see the daughter of the complainant, they heard the daughter of the complainant screaming. When the complainant’s wife and brother-in-law hit the door of the living room of the neighbour Yaseen, the door opened and they saw that the salwar of the victim had come off and the accused was forcefully raping the victim. The marks of forced rape were visible on the left cheek and hands of the victim.

3. The case was investigated and the accused was charge sheeted under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and section 5 (k)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

4. The accused was summoned and charges were framed against him on 04.07.2015 under section 376(2) of IPC and section 5 (k)/6 of the POCSO Act, which the accused denied and claimed trial. On 15.07.2015, additional charge under section 366 of IPC was framed against the accused.

5. The following witnesses were examined for the purpose of proving the charges on behalf of the prosecution:

(i) P.W.1-mother of the victim

(ii) P.W.2- father of the victim / complainant

(iii) P.W.3- maternal uncle of the victim

(iv) P.W.4- Dr. Parul Mehra

(v) P.W.5- S.I. Saroj Kamboj

6. The prosecution has produced Tahrir, Exhibit Ka-1; copy of date of birth certificate of the victim, Exhibit Ka-2; Medical report, Exhibit Ka-3; photo copy of MLC register, Exhibit Ka-4; supplementary report, Exhibit Ka-5; site map, Exhibit Ka-6; G.D. Copy, Exhibit Ka-7; charge sheet, Exhibit Ka-8; Forensic Science Laboratory Examination report, Exhibit Ka-9; Chik FIR, Exhibit Ka-10, and; Copy of G.D., Exhibit Ka-11 as documentary evidence.

7. The statement of the accused was recorded under section 313 of the Cr.P.C in which the accused denied the alleged incident and stated that the witnesses had given false testimony. He further stated that “in the case of divorce between the complainant’s son and daughter-in-law, the complainant’s daughter-in-law had acted against the law of Shariyat, and the complainant had asked the accused to lie in his favour during the panchayat. When he refused for the same, these people nursed a grudge against him.” In support of his statement, the accused produced D.W.1 Kausar, D.W.2 Anwar Hussain and D.W.3 Mohd. Taseem in the court and got them examined.

8. P.W.1 mother of the victim in her cross examination had stated that on 26.03.2015, at 4:30 p.m. the victim suddenly went out of the house alone and did not return for a long time. When she along with her elder brother went out to search for her, and reached near the house of the accused, they