The court emphasized the need for accurate age assessment of minors in POCSO cases and the implications of evidentiary deficiencies on conviction.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)

4 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The sole appellant in this case is seeking suspension of his sentence and release on bail during pendency of the appeal. He has been convicted vide judgment dated 18.01.2025 and sentenced vide order dated 31.01.2025 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-VI-cum- Exclusive Special Judge ( POCSO Act ), Munger, in POCSO Case No. 40 of 2021 arising out of Mahila P.S. Case No. 31 of

2021 for the offences punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code , under Sections 4(2), 6 of the POCSO Act and Sections 3(1)(s) & 3(2)(v) of SC & ST Act. He has been only be sentenced under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and has been ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life, which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of natural life and fine of Rs.25,000/- and in default of payment of fine, he has to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months. 3. The prosecution story is based on written information submitted by the maternal grandfather of the victim on 23.09.2021 in Mahila P.S. Munger (Exhibit ‘3’). In his written application, he alleged that on 20.09.2021 at 06:00 PM his minor Natini had gone to the coaching institute of the appellant for studies. He alleged that taking the victim girl as a member of the Scheduled Caste, the informant committed rape with her and threatened her not to disclose it, otherwise her entire family would be killed and on non-disclosure of the same, he allured her with a promise to marry her. The informant alleged that the appellant had committed rape twice-thrice. The informant went to meet the appellant, whereupon the appellant abused him saying harijan and he had concealed the clothes of the victim which she was wearing at the time of the occurrence.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that it is evident from the FIR that the informant has disclosed the age of the victim as about 17 years and the first occurrence is said to have taken place on 20.09.2021 at 06:00 PM, but it is not stated that when the second and third occurrence had taken place.

5. It is submitted that the informant has, in course of his deposition as PW 5, stated that when his Natini had not returned home from coaching and he was coming from the side of the coaching of the appellant, he heard hulla and on reaching his house, he found that the victim was weeping. She disclosed that the appellant had stopped her after the coaching and thereafter committed rape with her. In his deposition, therefore, he has clearly said about the knowledge of the occurrence on the same day, i.e., 20.09.2021, but he has not stated in his examination-in-chief that the appellant had committed rape with the victim twice or thrice.

6. Learned counsel further submits that in the evidence of the informant, he has stated that his Natini’s house is in Laxmipur, Dhapri, which is at a distance of three kos from his house, but the victim was not studying in Laxmipur High School, she was studying in Lohchi High School, which was nearby his house. The IO (PW 7) has, however, stated in paragraph 30 of her deposition that she had not investigated as to in which school the victim was studying. The IO had not tried to get open the lock of the room in which the alleged occurrence had taken place in the coaching and she did not try to find out the name of any other student of the coaching.

7. Attention of this Court has been drawn to the evidence of the informant (PW 5) to submit that he is in habit of lodging cases under the SC/ST Act taking advantage of his being a member of the Scheduled Caste and in this regard in course of his cross-examination, he has admitted in paragraph 21 of his deposition that he has lodged two more cases in the Scheduled