Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AT AGARTALA
S. TALAPATRA, ARINDAM LODH, JJ.
Anwar Hossain Maishan - Appellant
Versus
The State of Tripura - Respondent
Crl. A(J) No. 31 of 2016
Decided On : 04-11-2019
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : P.K. Biswas, Sr. Adv. and P. Majumder, Adv.
For the Respondent: Ratan Datta, P.P.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; inconsistencies in the victim's testimony and lack of corroborating evidence warrant acquittal.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 366 and 506 - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Section 4 - Appeal against conviction - Appellant convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for kidnapping and sexual assault on a minor - The trial court found evidence sufficient to prove the offences, highlighting the testimonies of multiple witnesses including the victim and mother (Paras 1, 7, 36, 42).
(B) Evaluation of evidence - The court reviewed the testimonies and noted inconsistencies, particularly regarding the timeline and conduct of the victim which raised doubts about the prosecution's case (Paras 38, 41).
Facts of the case:
On 28.01.2015, the appellant allegedly kidnapped a minor girl from a public place, compelled her to marry, and assaulted her. The complaint was lodged by the victim's mother on 24.02.2015 (Paras 3, 24).
Findings of Court:
The Court concluded that the evidence presented did not support the prosecution's claims sufficiently, particularly highlighting contradictions in witness statements and lack of corroborative evidence (Paras 38, 42).
Issues: The main issues revolved around the credibility of the victim’s testimony, the sufficiency of evidence for conviction, and the timeline of events leading to the complaint (Paras 5, 38).
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized a high standard of proof required in sexual offences and noted discrepancies in the victim's account undermined her credibility, leading to reasonable doubt about the appellant's guilt (Paras 43, 44).
Result: Judgment and order of conviction reversed; the appellant acquitted and set free.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of conviction and sentencing (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. complaint initiation and charges (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. presentation of evidence and prosecution case (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. defense arguments against conviction (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 12) |
| 5. nature of expert testimony and its evaluation (Para 13 , 21 , 22) |
| 6. reliability of victim's testimony (Para 15 , 17 , 18) |
| 7. assessment of victim's age and evidence (Para 19 , 20) |
| 8. detailed analysis of witness accounts (Para 23 , 24 , 27) |
| 9. contradictions in victim's testimony (Para 37 , 39) |
| 10. court's conclusion on credibility of evidence (Para 40 , 41 , 42) |
JUDGMENT :
S. TALAPATRA, J.
1. This is an appeal by the convict [hereinafter referred to as the appellant] from the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 18.05.2016 delivered in Case No. Special(POCSO) 01 of 2015. By the said judgment, the appellant has been convicted under Sections 366 and 506 of the IPC and under Section 4 of Protection of Child from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 [the POCSO Act, in short].
2. Pursuant to the said judgment of conviction, the appellant has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 10,000/- with default stipulation for committing offence punishable under Section 4 of the POCSO Act, the rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs. 5000/- with default stipulation for committing offence punishable under Section 366 of the IPC and rigorous imprisonment for two years for committing offence punishable under Section 506 of the with direction that the sentences will run consecutively.
3. The genesis of the prosecution case is rooted in the complaint filed by one Selina Aktar on 24.02.2015 revealing that on 21.02.2015, she was called by the Sonamura English Medium School where her minor daughter [the name is withheld for protecting her identity] was studying in Class-VI, to bring to her notice that on 14.02.2015, the valentine day, someone had sent chocolate for her daughter. She was advised to be cautious. After persuading her daughter repeatedly, she came to know that the appellant who used to come to their house to park his bike and on several occasions, he had advanced unfair proposal. As her daughter did not give in, she was threatened. On 28.01.2015, when she was on her way to her school, the appellant kidnapped her daughter by a car [Indica] from a place near the Rainbow Club at Sonamura and after that, the appellant took her daughter, hereinafter referred to as the victim, to his relative's house under threat. Even, she had to participate in the marriage ceremony in presence of Kaji. The other two persons were also in the conspiracy. Her minor daughter had somehow released her from the appellant and managed to come back at home at 4.30 p.m., whereas the kidnapping took place at 10/10.30 a.m. The appellant threatened the victim showing the video clip that was taken when one woman removed her apparel and made her wear Saree etc. Out of fear, the victim did not inform the said occurrence to anyone. On the day of revelation i.e. 24.02.2015, the complaint was filed.
4. Based on the said complaint, Sonamura P.S. Case No. 2015 SNM023 under Section 366 /376(2)(1)/506/34 of the IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act was registered and taken up for investigation. On completion of investigation, the police report was filed to the Special Court [under POCSO Act] and in due course, the charge against the appellant was framed under Sections 366 , 376(2)(i) of the and 506 of the and Section 4 of the POCSO Act. The appellant having pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Subsequently, the charge was framed also under section 366A and 120B of the , to which the appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to face the trial.
5. In order to substantiate the charge, the prosecution adduced as many as fourteen witnesses including the victim [PW-1], the informant [PW-2], the Medical Officer [PW-11] and the Investigating Officer [PW-13]. That apart, as many as ten documenta
