Table of Content
1. summary of conviction and prosecution case (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments regarding delay and tutoring (Para 3 , 4)
3. evaluation of oral and medical evidence (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
4. legal standards for child witness testimony (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
5. rejection of defense claims on property and tutoring (Para 13 , 14 , 15)
6. confirmation of conviction and dismissal of appeal (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20)

JUDGMENT

1. The present appeal arises in the context of the judgment of conviction rendered by the Trial Court on 16.05.2016, whereby the appellant was convicted for the offences under Section 6 POCSO and Section 506 IPC; as well as the order on sentence dated 18.05.2016, vide which the appellant was sentenced to undergo:-

i. RI for 2 years along with payment of fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default whereof he would undergo SI for 1 month, for the offence under Section 506 IPC; and

ii. RI for a period of 10 years along with fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default whereof he would undergo 6 months SI, for the offence punishable under Section 6 POCSO Act.

Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently and the benefit under Section 428 Cr.P.C. was granted to the appellant.

2. The facts as have emerged from the prosecution case are that the victim, a child aged 11 years, claimed that she was residing with her parents and 2 brothers, and that she was studying in 8th standard. Her father expired in the year 2006, whereafter her mother contracted a second marriage in the year 2009 with the accused, i.e., her stepfather. She alleged that her stepfather did not like her or her brother who had been born out of her mother’s first marriage. Whenever her mother used to go to market, the stepfather would also send her two brothers away and, for the 6 months before the registration of the complaint, he had committed forcible vaginal and anal intercourse with her. He had further threatened her that in case she disclosed the incident to anyone, he would kill her and her mother. About a week before registration of the FIR, she was sleeping with her mother and brother on the floor, while the accused was sleeping on the bed. As it was dark in the night, the accused lied beside her and started touching her chest, and the same was seen by her mother, whereafter the child victim disclosed the entire facts to her. In the above backdrop, the FIR came to be lodged. The medical examination of the victim was conducted and her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. also came to be recorded. The exhibits seized were sent to FSL. On completion of investigation, the chargesheet was filed, and thereafter charges were framed under Section 506 IPC and under Section 5 (l) (m) (n) and (p) of the POCSO Act; and alternatively, under Section 376 (2) (f) (i) and (n) IPC as well as Section 377 IPC. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the child victim has alleged that the acts in question were being committed for the last 6 months before the lodging of the complaint and that the last act was allegedly committed a week prior, which shows that there was still a delay of 8 days in the reporting of the incident. Further, the victim’s mother refused internal medical examination of the victim. Lastly, it is stated that the testimony of the child victim is unreliable as there are material contradictions between the victim and her mother’s depositions.

4. The contentions are opposed by the learned APP for State, as well as the learned Amicus Curiae appointed to represent the victim. Learned Amicus contended that the child victim has consistently stated about the offence committed by the accused. The identity of the appellant not being in doubt, his culpability stands established. He further submits that though the appellant gave suggestions to the victim’s mother stating that he was falsely implicated as she had the intention of usurping his property in connivance with her uncle R

Click Here to Read the rest of this document