Insufficient evidence led to a conviction for sexual harassment under a lesser offence rather than the initial charges of sexual assault.

1. Heard Mr. S. Lodh, learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as Mr. B. Choudhury, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the state.

2. This is an appeal under S.374(2) of the Cr.P.C. from the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 24.03.2017 delivered in Special (POCSO) 32 of 2015 by the Special Judge, North Tripura, Dharmanagar.

3. By the said judgment, the appellant has been convicted under S.354B of the IPC and S.8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, 'POCSO Act'). Pursuant thereto, the appellant has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 3(three) years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000 (rupees ten thousand) for commission of offence punishable under S.8 of the POCSO Act, with default imprisonment for 6(six) months. It has been directed that on realization of fine, the money should be paid to the victim as compensation and the said money be managed in a fixed deposit till she attained the majority. No separate sentence has been given for commission of offence punishable under S.354B of the IPC.

4. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that from the complaint of the victim, PW.2 (the name is withheld for protection of her identity), it revealed that on 17.08.2015 when she went to visit her grandmother, she visited to a neighbouring quarters. Before she arrived in her grandmother's place, her grandmother left for the office. At that time, one boy who was working in the neighbouring quarters saw her and asked her to bring a piece of wood. Then, the said boy entered in her grandmother's quarters and tried to remove her pant from her wearing with evil motive. She punched on the chest of that boy and scolded him. Thereafter, the boy held her legs and told her not to say the incident to anyone. Then she rushed to the office of her grandmother, but her grandmother was also not available there. Then she informed a lady the entire incident and later on she informed the said incident to her grandmother. The victim came to know that the name of that boy was Amar Suklabaidya, the present appellant.

5. The victim submitted the complaint orally to the police and on the basis of the said complaint, Dharmanagar Women P.S. Case No.2015 WDN 013 dated 17.08.2015 was registered under S.354B of the IPC and under S.8 of the POCSO Act. The investigation was carried out by one, Rinki Debbarma, one Sub-Inspector of Police (PW.6).

6. On completion of the investigation, the final police report under S.173(2) of the Cr.P.C. was filed against the appellant for commission of the offence punishable under S.354B of the IPC and under S.8 of the POCSO Act, 2012. The police papers were committed to the Special Court, which took cognizance and framed the charge under S.354B of the IPC and under 'S.7' of the POCSO Act, punishable under S.8 of the POCSO Act against the appellant for intending to outrage the modesty of the victim (PW.2) and for acting with sexual intent to touch the body of the victim.

The appellant pleaded innocence and claimed to be tried in accordance with law.

7. To substantiate the charge, the prosecution adduced as many as 7(seven) witnesses including the victim and introduced 7(seven) documentary evidence including the oral ejahar (Exbt.1).

8. Mr. S. Lodh, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that the age of the victim has not been established by the prosecution with legal evidence and the evidentiary materials is inadequate for substantiating the charge under S.354B of the IPC and under S.8 of the POCSO Act. Mr. Lodh, learned counsel,