The conviction can be sustained solely on the victim's credible testimony under POCSO, even without corroboration, emphasizing the need for sensitivity in child victim cases.

JUDGMENT :

N. MALA, J.

(1)The above Criminal Appeal is preferred by the appellant / accused against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 05.05.2021, made in Spl.SC.No.49 of 2018, by the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Dindigul, convicting and sentencing the appellant/accused for the offences under Section 5(l)(m) r/w 6 of POCSO Act and under Section506(i) of IPC.

(2)The factual scenario as unfolded during the course of trial is as follows:-

(a)The case of the prosecution, in brief was that, the victim girl was aged 12 years at the time of occurrence. She was studying VIII Standard at Government Girls Higher Secondary School, Dindigul and was residing along with her parents in Dindigul. The accused was temporarily working in the Railways as a gate man in a level crossing. The accused was known to the victim and her family since it was the usual practice of the accused to visit the garden of the Defacto complainant, for bathing and for taking rest. Due to this, a close relationship developed between the accused and the family of the defacto complainant. On 02.09.2018 at about 05.30 p.m., when the victim girl went to the grocery shop to purchase sugar and returning to her house by crossing the railway gate, the accused called her, and forcibly pulled her into his hut and committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault on her. The accused criminally intimidated the victim girl by stating that if she disclosed the crime to her family, he would kill her father and brother. The victim therefore did not disclose the crime to anyone. Again on 03.09.2018, at about 05.30 p.m., when the victim girl was returning to her house from the School, the accused committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault on her. Thereafter, PW2, the mother of the victim, lodged a complaint before the All Women Police Station, Dindigul on 09.09.2018, under Ex.P2.

(b)Based on the complaint of PW2, the FIR came to be registered under Ex.P.7, in Crime No.13/2018, on 09.09.2018. PW.18- M/s.Jasmin Mumthaj, Inspector of Police, took up the investigation and after examination of witnesses, arrested the appellant/accused on 11.09.2018. Thereafter, on completion of other formalities like recording the 164[5] Cr.P.C., statements, the statement of the victim girl [PW1], P.W.18 filed the Final Report, on 08.10.2018, for the offences under Sections 5(l), 5(m) and 6 of POCSO Act.

(c)The Final Report was taken on file on 16.10.2018 by the Trial Court in Spl.SC.No.49/2018. On 20.11.2018, the charges were framed against the appellant/accused for the offences under Section 5(l)(m) r/w 6 of POCSO Act and Section 506(i) of IPC. The appellant/accused denied the charges and pleaded not guilty.

(3)The prosecution in order to bring home the guilt of the appellant/accused, examined PW1 to PW18 and filed Exs.P1 to P11. On the side of the accused, no evidence was adduced.

(4)The Trial Court, on completion of trial, found the appellant/accused guilty of the aforesaid offences and convicted and sentenced him as follows:-

(5)Aggrieved by the aforesaid conviction and sentence, the appellant has preferred the above Criminal Appeal for the aforesaid relief.

(6) The respondent filed written submissions. The respondent stated that the evidence of P.W.1 is clear and trustworthy and therefore no corroboration was needed. The respondent, however, stated that the evidence of the victim was corroborated by the evidence of P.W.17 the Doctor, Prema, who issued Ex.P..6 series. The respondent stated that the version of the accused that the case was falsely foisted against him because of certain family