SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Megh) 211

HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
ARNAB LAMIN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MEGHALAYA – Respondent
Crl.A. 22 / 2024



Serial No. 01 Regular List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Crl.A. No. 22 of 2024 Date of Decision: 09.03.2026 Shri. Arnab Lamin, Son of (L) Bidren Latam, Resident of Lumshnong Village, P.S Khliehriat, East Jaintia Hills, Meghalaya.

….... Appellant Vs.

State of Meghalaya represented by the Commissioner & Secretary to the Department of Home (Police)

Government of Meghalaya, Shillong-793001.

..….. Respondent Coram:

Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge Hon’ble Mr. Justice B. Bhattacharjee, Judge Appearance:

For the Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Mr. M. Sharma, Legal Aid Counsel.

Ms. T. Buam, Adv.

For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Sengupta, Addl. PP with Mr. R. Gurung, GA.

i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No Law journals etc.:

ii) Whether approved for publication in press: Yes/No Per W. Diengdoh, (J):

JUDGMENT AND ORDER

1. On the basis of an FIR dated 17.06.2015, lodged before the Officer In-Charge, A.D. Camp Lumshnong by Smti. Dhunlang Patlong, wherein an allegation has been made that one person by the name Arnab Lamin, on 16.06.2015 at about 04:30 PM had invited her minor son aged about 8 years old to accompany him by offering corn, thereafter, he took him to one rented house belonging to his mother-in-law, and upon entering the said house, he locked the door and thereafter, he took off her son’s clothes and committed sexual assault. After the act, he released her son and threatened him not to disclose the same to anyone or else he will beat him. When her son came home, she noticed he was suffering and could not sit properly. On being questioned, he related everything that had happened to him. The FIR was filed with a prayer to punish the said perpetrator in accordance with law.

2. The In-charge A.D. Camp Lumshnong forwarded the said FIR to the Officer In-Charge, Khliehriat, the same being received at about 03:45 PM on 17.06.2015, whereupon, a case being Khliehriat P.S Case No. 277 (6) 15 under Section 506 IPC read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act was registered. On the same day at about 01:30 PM, the alleged perpetrator, that is Shri. Arnab Lamin was arrested by the police and remanded to police custody.

3. Accordingly, investigation was launched and the Investigating Officer had carried out the investigation by following due procedure, that is, initially sending the victim as well as the accused person for their respective medical examination on 17.06.2015. In due course, the investigation on being completed, the Investigation Officer had filed the Charge Sheet with the remark that in course of investigation, a prima facie case under Section 506 IPC read with Section 18 of the POCSO Act, has been found well-established against the accused person, namely Shri. Arnab Lamin and he is directed to stand trial before the court of law.

4. On 24.05.2016, the case of the accused/appellant herein, came before the Court of the learned Special Judge (POCSO) in Special Sessions Case No. 25/2015, on which the charges against the appellant herein were framed being under Section 506 IPC read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act. 5. The prosecution has then brought to the witness stand as many as 10(ten) witnesses, including the complainant, who was examined as PW-1, and the victim who was examined as PW-3. The doctor who had conducted the medical examination upon the victim as well as the Investigating Officer, were also examined as Prosecution witnesses among others.

6. On the evidence of the prosecution witnesses being recorded finally, the learned Trial Judge had recorded the statement of the accused/appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C on 12.01.2022. The appellant was then called upon to adduce evidence, has rejected the offer, and accordingly, the final argument of the parties was heard by the court, eventually leading to the passing of the impugned judgment and order dated 07.03.2022, finding the accused/appellant guilty for having committed the offence under Section 5(m)/6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 read with Section 377 and Section 506 IPC. On the same day

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top