The prosecution failed to prove the victim's age as a minor and lacked sufficient evidence to support claims of coercion in the alleged sexual assault case.

JUDGMENT : 

K. Surender, J.

The appellant/accused filed the present appeal aggrieved by the conviction recorded by the trial Court for the offence under Sections 363, 342 , 376(2)(n) , 376(2)(f) , 376(3) , 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5(l) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act by the trial Court.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the victim girl-PW.3 is the daughter of PWs.1 and 2 who are father and mother, respectively. The accused is the paternal uncle of PW.3. While PW.3 was studying in IX standard she used to stay in a hostel. The appellant used to go to the hostel and proposed to marry her. He asked her to accompany him. After completion of her IX class, during summer holidays, she went to her parents’ house at Madigundla Thanda.

3. On 03.06.2022 around 12:00 noon, the appellant went to her house in a car and then took PW.3 in the car forcibly stating that they would stay in Hyderabad. The accused kept PW.3 in B.N.Reddy Colony in a room taken on rent from PW.6. He put a chain around her neck stating that they were married and that they are husband and wife. The appellant had sexual intercourse with PW.3, several times and whenever he went outside the house, he used to lock the door by keeping PW.3 inside. She stayed in the room for eight months. On 20.02.2023, she escaped from the room and went to her parents’ house. There she informed the incident to PW.2-mother. Then she was taken to the police station. PW.3 stated that her Date of Birth is 16.05.2007 and she was aged 15 years when the incident had taken place. The Police sent PW.3 to the hospital for medical examination after her statement was recorded at Bharosa Center.

4. PW.1 is the father of the victim who stated that that the victim girl was aged 17 years in the year 2022, when she was found missing. She was found missing from the house on 03.06.2022, as such, PW.1 lodged complaint Ex.P1 with the Police on 07.06.2022. On 20.02.2023, the victim returned and informed that the appellant had detained her in a room and committed rape on her for eight months. Further, hands and legs of the victim were tied and she was confined in a room. PW.2 mother of PW.3 stated similar to what PW.1-father has stated. However, the mother-PW.2 stated that PW.3 was aged 15 years when the incident had taken place in the year 2022.

5. The Police collected Bonafide Certificate-Ex.P2 showing the date of birth of PW.3 as 16.05.2007, which was provided by the Head Master in Kasthuribaa Gandhi Balika Vidyalayam (KGBV), Devarakonda, and filed charge sheet. During the course of trial, the learned Sessions Judge having examined witnesses and placing reliance on the evidence of victim-PW.3 and other corroborating evidence including Ex.P2-Bonafide Certificate issued by PW.5, found the appellant guilty. Further, reliance was also placed on the medical evidence of the doctor-PW.9.

6. PW.2-mother stated that PW.3 was aged 15 years at the time of incident. PW.3-victim girl has also stated that she was 15 years when the incident had taken place. Reliance was placed on Ex.P2- Bonafide Certificate which was issued by PW.5 who is the Special Officer in KGBV, Devarakonda. The said certificate was issued on 23.02.2023 stating that PW.3 studied VII class in the year 2019 till IX class in the year 2021. According to the school admission register, the Date of Birth of PW.3 was 16.05.2007.

7. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant mainly argued on the ground that the age of the victim girl was not proved by the prosecution to be 15 years. Further, the place of offence was not specifically proved by the prosecution. The prosecution states that she was detained in B.N.Reddy Colony. However, the place of detention according to the prosecution was in the house of PW.6 at Bonguluru gate and the distance between Bonguluru Gate and B.N.Reddy Colony is 14 K.Ms. In fact, the charge was also framed that she was detained in a residence at Bonguluru gate. Though, PW.6-owner of the house was examined, she did no