JUDGMENT:

Per W. Diengdoh, (J)

1. An incident concerning an act of rape perpetrated on the minor daughter of the complainant, wherein an FIR was filed on 27.01.2019, before the Officer-In-charge, Women Police Station, Nongpoh then Ri-Bhoi District, has set into motion the prosecution case against the accused/appellant herein.

2. It is the case of the prosecution that the complainant in the said FIR had informed the Officer In-charge, that on 26.01.2019 the survivor had disclosed to her grandparents that her father/accused had sexually assaulted her for the last 4 years, the most recent incident having occurred in the month of November, 2018. On receipt of the FIR, the Officer In-charge, Women Police Station, Ri-Bhoi District, registered a cognizable case vide Women P.S. Case No. 6 (1) 2019 under Section 5(1)(n)/6 of POCSO Act and WPSI J. Nongsiej was entrusted with the investigation of the case.

3. Accordingly, the appellant/accused was arrested on 27.01.2019 in connection with the abovementioned case and he was never enlarged on bail till the date of conviction. On investigation launched, the statement of the survivor (aged about 13 years) was recorded under Section 164 CrPC. She was also examined by a Medical and Health Officer and biological samples were lifted from the survivor as well as the accused. Upon completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer (IO) has submitted the charge sheet vide Charge Sheet No. 10/2019 dated 25.05.2019 in the Court of the Special Judge, Nongpoh, Ri-Bhoi District, finding a prima facie case well made out against the appellant/convict for committing offences defined and punishable under Section 5(1)(m)(n)/6 POCSO Act.

4. On 16.07.2019, the learned Trial Court has framed the charges against the appellant/convict for commission of offence punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act to which the appellant/accused had pleaded guilty. However, the trial Court has not convicted the appellant/accused under Section 229 CrPC but proceed to record evidence of the relevant witnesses.

5. During the trial of the case, prosecution has examined 8(eight) prosecution witnesses and exhibited 13 (thirteen) numbers of documents to establish its case. After the completion of the prosecution evidence, the appellant/convict was examined under Section 313 CrPC where he has denied to have committed any offence.

6. Then the learned Trial Court heard the argument of the prosecution and the defense on the 11.06.2021 and vide judgment dated 18.06.2021 passed in Special POCSO Case No. 12 of 2019, convicted the appellant/accused under Section 5(l)(m) & (n) of POCSO Act. Consequently, vide order of sentence dated 25.06.2021 the appellant was sentenced under Section 6 of the POCSO Act to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of ₹ 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) only and in default of payment of fine to undergo further 3(three) months rigorous imprisonment.

7. In appeal before this Court, the appellant duly represented by the learned Legal Aid Counsel has assailed the impugned judgment and sentence and has submitted that the appreciation of the evidence on record does not inspire confidence to come to the conclusion that a case is made out against the appellant/accused beyond reasonable doubt.

8. Mr. S.D. Upadhaya, learned Legal Aid Counsel in his argument has raised the first objection as regard the manner in which the charge has been framed to say that the charge framed was under one head and is confined to “aggravated sexual assault punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012”. However, the conviction is for offences said to have been committed under Section 5(l)(m) & (n) of the POCSO Act, therefore there was no specific charge framed against the appellant. This runs contrary to the provisions of Section 211 CrPC, submits the learned Legal Aid Counsel.

9. The learned Legal Aid Counsel has also submitted that the survivor in her statement before the court has alleged that she was sexually assaulted, b