Victim's consistent testimony is sufficient for conviction in sexual offense cases, and scientific evidence serves as corroborative, not definitive.

JUDGMENT

Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, J.

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present appeal is filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure , 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “the CrPC”) on behalf of the Appellant – Praveen @ Lallu to set aside the judgment dated 10^th May, 2024 (hereinafter referred to as “the impugned judgment”) and the Order-on- Sentence dated 10^th July, 2024 (hereinafter referred to as “the impugned order on sentence”) passed by the court of Additional Sessions Judge (SC- POCSO)-02, North – East District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “the trial court”), in Sessions Case bearing SC No. 71/2019 arising out of FIR bearing No. 532/2018 registered at PS Karawal Nagar, Delhi. The Appellant, vide the impugned judgment, was held guilty for committing the offences punishable under Sections 363 /366/376DA/377/34 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act and the Appellant, vide the impugned order on sentence was sentenced as follows :-

“(a) Under Section 363 of IPC

Rigorous Imprisonment for Two Years and fine of Rupees Five Thousand Only (Rs. 5,000/-). In default of payment of fine, the convict shall further undergo Rigorous Imprisonment of six months.

(b) Under Section 366 of IPC

Rigorous Imprisonmentfor Three Years and fine of Five Thousand Only (Rs. 5,000/-). In default of payment of fine, the convict shall further undergo Rigorous Imprisonment of six months.

(c) Under Section 376DA of IPC

Rigorous Imprisonment for Life and fine of Rupees Ten Thousand (Rs. 10,000/-). In default of payment of fine, the convict shall further undergo Rigorous Imprisonment of twelve months.

(d) Under Section 377 of IPC

Rigorous Imprisonment for Ten Years and fine of Rupees Ten Thousand Only (Rs. 10,000/-). In default of payment of fine, the convict shall further undergo Rigorous Imprisonment of six months.

All the sentences shall run concurrently.

Benefit of Section 428 CrP.C. shall be granted to the Convict

Brief Background:

3. Briefly stated, the prosecution’s case, as reflected in the charge sheet is that on 12^th November, 2018 at about 09:00 PM, the Appellant kidnapped the Prosecutrix (‘assumed name-S’) from the lawful guardianship of her parents with the intention to commit illicit intercourse. After kidnapping the Prosecutrix, the Appellant, along with co-accused Kalu, who is stated to be absconding, took the Prosecutrix to a jungle and committed gang rape and carnal intercourse with the Prosecutrix against the order of nature.

4. After the medical examination and counselling of the Prosecutrix, the statement of the Prosecutrix was recorded by the police. On the basis of that statement, an FIR under Sections 363 /376D/377/34 IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act was registered.

5. During investigation, the statement of the Prosecutrix was recorded underSection164oftheCrPC.TheAppellantwasarrestedon29^thNovember, 2018, and the TIP of the Appellant was conducted, where the Prosecutrix identified the Appellant. The co-accused Kalu was not arrested in this case as he had initially absconded and then passed away on 20^th October, 2020. The statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. Exhibits collected during the investigation were sent to FSL for examination.

6. Upon completion of investigation, chargesheet was filed against the Appellant.Theprosecution,inordertoproveitscase,examined13witnesses. The statement of the Appellant was recorded under Section 313 of the CrPC, wherein the Appellant had denied the incriminating evidence and pleaded innocence and claimed false implication. The trial resulted in conviction, as aforesaid. Being aggrieved and dissat