Back
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
Mr. Justice B. Bhattacharjee, J
ARJUN BORO – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MEGHALAYA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. fir lodged regarding assault (Para 1) |
| 2. defense challenges identity and evidence (Para 2 , 3 , 5) |
| 3. prosecution counters defense claims (Para 4) |
| 4. identity of appellant established (Para 6) |
| 5. delay in fir not unreasonable (Para 7) |
| 6. distinguishing previous case law (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 7. conviction quashed (Para 25 , 26 , 27) |
JUDGMENT AND ORDER
This Criminal appeal under Section 374 (2) Cr.P.C is filed against the Judgment and order of conviction dated 18-05-2022 and sentence of even date passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO)/ Addl D.C(J), East Jaintia Hills District, Khliehriat in POCSO Case No. 8/2020 (new), [Spl Session No.18/19 (old)] whereby the accused/appellant was convicted under Section 3(a)/4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) and awarded a sentence of 7 (seven) years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand rupees) only and in default to undergo one month’s simple imprisonment.
1. The fact of the case is that on 19-08-2018 a written FIR was lodged by the complainant to the effect that on the midnight of 17-08- 2018, her so
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
