Back
2021 Supreme(Tri) 82
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AT AGARTALA
Arindam Lodh, J.
Rakhal Sarkar - Appellants
Vs.
The State of Tripura - Respondent
Crl. A. 10/2020
Decided On : 26-02-2021
For the Appellant :S. Lodh, Advocate
For the Respondents: S. Ghosh, Addl. PP
Inconsistencies and lack of corroboration in the prosecution's evidence can lead to the drawing of adverse inferences and may result in the court concluding that the finding of guilt cannot be sustained.
Headnote:
POCSO - Sexual Offences - IPC 451, 354, 506 - POCSO Act, 2012 - Section 8
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for offences under IPC Sections 451, 354, 506 and Section 8 of the POCSO Act based on the prosecution's case of sexual assault and criminal intimidation against a minor victim. The appellant appealed the conviction.
Finding of the Court:
The court found discrepancies in the statements of the victim, her mother, and the father, as well as lack of corroboration from independent witnesses. The court drew adverse inference against the prosecution's version and concluded that the finding of guilt could not be sustained.
Issues: Discrepancies in the statements of the victim, her mother, and the father, lack of corroboration from independent witnesses, and absence of seized evidence raised doubts about the prosecution's case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the lack of consistency and corroboration in the prosecution's evidence, leading to the drawing of an adverse inference and the ultimate conclusion that the finding of guilt could not be sustained.
Final Decision: The judgment of conviction and order of sentence imposed by the trial court were set aside and quashed, and the appellant was discharged from the liability of the bail bond and set at liberty.
JUDGMENT :
Arindam Lodh, J.
1. Heard Mr. S. Lodh, learned Counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. S. Ghosh, learned Additional PP appearing for the State-respondent.
2. This appeal arises out of the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 12.02.2020 in connection with case No. Special (POCSO) 48 of 2017 whereby and whereunder the learned Special Judge, West Tripura, Agartala had convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under Sections 451, 354 and 506 of the IPC and under Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short POCSO) and, sentenced him to suffer R.I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- with default stipulation for commission of offence under section 451 IPC and further sentenced him to suffer R.I. for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/- with default stipulation for commission of offence under Section 8 of the POCSO Act and, further sentenced the appellant to suffer R.I. for six months for commission of offence under section 506 IPC.
3. The prosecution case, as highlighted by the learned Special Judge, West Tripura, Agartala is reproduced here-under:
"The victim (name withheld) was a student of class-VII in the year 2016. The victim used to call the accused Rakhal Sarkar as ' Jethu' (senior uncle) being one of their neighbours. She used to go to her school as well as to the house of her private tutor taking the road in front of the house of accused. The accused used to call the victim to his house showing love and affection towards the victim used to touch her body and chest. Initially, out of shame the victim did not raise any objection but subsequently on 25.08.2016 when the accused taking the victim to his house, touched her private part the victim forcefully removed the hands of accused and on returning to the house narrated the incidents to her mother. Out of shame and on thinking about future of the victim matter was not disclosed to any other person. On 28.09.2016 around 5.45 p.m. the victim returned to their house from her school when her mother went to toilet. Father of the victim was at his shop at Madhab Bari. Taking the advantage of loneliness of the victim, the accused entered their dwelling house and embraced the victim from back side with ill motive and also tried to put off her wearing pant. The victim, therefore, raised alarm and on hearing her alarm her mother rushed back to their dwelling home and caught the accused but, the accused managed to flee away pushing the mother of the victim to the ground. While escaping the accused threatened them not to inform such incident to anybody otherwise he would driven them out from the locality. Out of fear, the matter was not disclosed. Taking this opportunity the accused used to loiter around their house and also used to threat them. Finding no alternative mother of the victim informed the matter to local Panchayat headman (Pradhan) and the Panchayat member who advised the mother of the victim to seek redress in the police station. The headmen of the police station could not detain the accused being fled away. Lastly, on 25.08.2017 accused again came to the house of the victim and threatened her mother saying that he would see how the marriage of victim would solemnize".
4. The Officer-in-Charge of the police station on the basis of the aforesaid complaint registered Ranirbazaar PS case No. 2017 RNB 037, dated 12.09.2017 under Sections 341/448/354B/506 of the IPC and under Section 8 of the POCSO Act. The incident was investigated by S.I. Chandra Debbarma, here-in-after referred to as the I.O. In course of investigation, the I.O. visited the place of occurrence, prepared the hand sketch map, recorded statement of the available witnesses and arranged for recording of the statement of the victim girl under Section 164(5) of C.P.C.. The I.O. also seized the birth certificate of the victim by preparing seizure list. Having found a prima facie case, as was established, the I.O. submitted charge s
