Guilt under the POCSO Act does not require injury proof; the accused carries the burden of proof to disprove allegations of sexual assault.

JUDGMENT

Arindam Lodh, J. - Heard Mr. Kawsik Nath, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Also heard Mr. S. Debnath, learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State-respondent.

2. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 09.02.2021, passed by the Ld. Special Judge, Fast Track Special Court, Unakoti Judicial District, Kailashahar, in Case No. Special (POCSO) 10/2019 whereby and whereunder the appellant herein has been convicted under Section 8 of POCSO Act and was sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for three years.

3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that, on the fateful date and time the victim was taken by the appellant to his nearby house. After they entered into the room the appellant had closed all the doors and the windows of the room. In the complaint it is stated that inside the room the daughter of the complainant was sexually assaulted by the appellant.

4. The said complaint lodged by the father (PW-1) of the victim girl was treated as FIR. Having registered the FIR, the Officer In-Charge of the Police Station endorsed the case to the I.O. The I.O. during his investigation recorded the statements of the prosecution witnesses and also arranged for recording the statement of the victim girl under Section 164 (5) of the Cr.P.C. The victim was medically examined. The I.O. collected the reports of the Medical Officer. Thereafter, on being satisfied with the evidence so collected, the I.O. has submitted the charge-sheet against the appellant.

5. The learned Special Judge taking cognizance of the offence had framed charges against the appellant under Section 8 of the POCSO Act 2012, and under Sections 341 /376AB read with Section 511 of IPC.

6. To substantiate the aforesaid charges, the prosecution had introduced as many as 15(fifteen) witnesses. The prosecution also introduced relevant documents including medical examination report of the victim girl. After completion of recording evidences, the appellant was examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., wherein he denied all the allegations levelled against him by the prosecution witnesses, but, he denied to adduce evidence on his behalf.

7. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and after perusal of the records, the learned Special Judge held that the appellant is guilty of committing the offence punishable under Section 8 of the POCSO Act and convicted and sentenced the appellant as afore-stated.

8. Feeling aggrieved, and dissatisfied with the aforesaid conviction and sentence, the appellant has preferred the instant appeal before this court.

9. Mr. Nath, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that out of enmity the appellant has been implicated with the instant case. In support of his submission, Mr. Nath, learned counsel has drawn my attention to the deposition of PW-10, Gita Sabdakar, who during her evidence has stated that 'it is a fact that there is a dispute between the accused and Ratan Sabdakar and Hari Sabdakar in connection with a ring-well nearby their house'.

10. I have taken note of this part of evidence as let in by PW-10. On further perusal of the deposition of PW-10, it comes to light that, PW-10 has specifically stated that 'I do not have any dispute with complainant Ratan Shabdarkar and we reside happily with each other'. PW-10, has further stated that 'It is not true that I do not bring out the victim under the bed of Setu Ghosh'.

11. Mr. Nath, learned counsel has also submitted that from the sketch map it reveals that the house of the appellant is far away from the house of the victim girl. Mr.