Sessions Courts are not empowered to impose a sentence of imprisonment for the remainder of natural life; such power is exclusively reserved for Constitutional Courts, though the Court may impose the mandatory minimum imprisonment as prescribed by the POCSO Act.

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 374(2) OF CR.P.C., (SECTION 415 (2) OF BNSS), PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN SPL. S.C. POCSO NO.37/2020 AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION DATED 20.06.2023 AND ORDER OF SENTENCE DATED 22.06.2023 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-1, AT KOPPAL IN SPL.S.C. POCSO NO.37/2020 AND ACQUIT THE APPELLANT FROM THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 376(3) AND 506 OF IPC AND SECTION 4(2) AND 6 OF POCSO ACT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MURALIDHARA PAI

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH)

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant, learned Addl. SPP for the respondent No.1/State as well as learned counsel for the respondent No.2/Complainant.

2. This appeal is filed against the judgment of conviction dated 20.06.2023 and order of sentence dated 22.06.2023 passed in SPL.S.C. POCSO NO.37/2020 by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-1, at Koppal (for short, ‘Trial Court’) for the offence punishable under Section 376(3) and 506 of IPC and Sections 4(2) and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.

3. The factual matrix of the case of prosecution is that PW3-victim is a minor girl aged about 15 years and accused No.1 and 2 are the residents of Jangamarakalgudi Village, Gangavathi Taluk, Kappal District, which comes within the limits of Gangavathi Rural Police Station. When the victim was going to house of accused No.1 to watch TV, accused No.1 used to touch her body, hands and chin. That on 01.01.2020 at about 11.00 a.m., Accused No.1 forcibly had sexual intercourse with the victim for the first time, despite her resistance and threatened her life with dire consequences, if she discloses the same to anybody and further warned her to come to his house whenever he calls upon her. The accused No.1 often called her to watch TV and had forcible sexual intercourse with her several times in his house. Though in the charge sheet, an allegation is made against accused No.2 and accused No.2 is acquitted by the trial Court and hence, no appeal against the acquittal and therefore, the other factual aspects in respect of accused No.2 is not mentioned in the present case. The police investigated the matter in respect of both the incident of accused No.1 and 2 and filed the charge sheet and after filing of the charge sheet, both accused No.1 and 2 were tried before the trial Court, since both of them claims trial and they did not plead guilty.

4. The prosecution in order to prove the charges, examined PW1 to PW17 and got marked on Ex.P1 to P55 and MOs 1 to 22. On behalf of the defence, accused No.1 examined himself as DW1 and got marked document D1 to D3. The trial Judge after completion of the prosecution evidence, examined both accused Nos.1 and 2 by invoking Section 313 of Cr.P.C. Both of them have denied the incriminating evidence. Accused No.2 submits that no defence evidence but accused No.1 has been examined. However, accused No.1 submitted his defence evidence and filed written statement stating that he had been intentionally implicated in the case. The accused No.1 is having a wife, children, daughter-in-law and grandchildren, who were residing along with him in a small house. It is contended that in the said situation, it is impossible to commit alleged rape on victim on several occasions, that too in his house. The trial Judge having considered both oral and d