Himachal Pradesh High Court
Raj Kumar vs Raj Kumar And Another on 21 March, 2022
Bench: Sabina, Satyen Vaidya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
ON THE 21st DAY OF MARCH, 2022
BEFORE
.
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SABINA
&
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATYEN VAIDYA
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.142 of 2019
Between:-
RAJ KUMAR, SON OF SH. DHARAM CHAND,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE
CHALAMA, P.O. BAKLOH, TEHSIL BHATIYAT,
DISTRICT CHAMBA, H.P.
r ......APPELLANT
(BY MR. RAM MURTI BISHT, ADVOCATE)
AND
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH ......RESPONDENT
(BY MR. VIKRANT CHANDEL, DEPUTY
ADVOCATE GENERAL)
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.23 of 2019
Between:-
SARDAR SINGH, SON OF SHRI GIAN SINGH,
AGED 49 YEARS, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE
MANOLA, POST OFFICE, HOBAR, TEHSIL
BHATTIYAT, DISTRICT CHAMBA, HIMACHAL
PRADESH, PRESENTLY WORKING AS CENTRAL
HEAD TEACHER, AT GOVERNMENT PRIMARY
SCHOOL, AWANH, EDUCATION BLOCK,
CHOWARI, DISTRICT CHAMBA, HIMACHAL
PRADESH. ......APPELLANT
::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2022 20:11:01 :::CIS
2
(BY MR. VIJAY CHAUDHARY, ADVOCATE)
AND
.
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH ......RESPONDENT
(BY MR. VIKRANT CHANDEL, DEPUTY
ADVOCATE GENERAL)
RESERVED ON : 15.03.2022
ANNOUNCED ON : 21.03.2022
___________________________________________________
These Letters Patent Appeals coming on for hearing this day,
Hon'ble Ms. Justice Sabina, delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
Vide this judgment, above mentioned two appeals would be disposed of as they have arisen out of common judgment/order dated 16.1.2019, passed by learned Special Judge, Chamba Division, District Chamba, H.P., in Sessions Trial No.57 of 2015, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Raj Kumar and another.
2. Prosecution case was set in motion on the basis of the statement of complainant, Chaman Singh to the effect that on 4.10.2015, parents of about 8/10 girl students informed him that appellant Raj Kumar indulged in sexual assault of the girl students in the school. On inquiry from the students, it transpired that accused Raj Kumar used to sexually assault the minor girls. After inquiry, he reported the matter to ::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2022 20:11:01 :::CIS 3 the School Management Committee, President, Jagdev Kumar.
Statements of the harassed girl students were recorded.
3. On the basis of the statement of complainant, Chaman Singh, .
formal FIR No.92/2015 dated 15.10.2015 was registered at Police Station, Chowari, District Chamba, under Sections 354-A, 377, 376(2)F, 506, 202 & 119 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short "the IPC") and Sections 4, 6, 21(2) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short "the POCSO Act").
4. After completion of the investigation and necessary formalities, Challan was presented against the appellants. Charges were framed against appellant Raj Kumar under Sections 354-A, 377, 376(2)F & 506 of the IPC and Sections 6 & 12 of the POCSO Act. So far as appellant, Sardar Singh is concerned, charges were framed against him under Sections 21(2) of the POCSO Act and Section 202 of the IPC. Appellants did not plead guilty to the charges framed against them and claimed trial.
5. In order to prove its case, prosecution examined 33 witnesses during trial. Appellants, when examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, after closure of the prosecution evidence, prayed that they were innocent and had been falsely involved in the present case. Appellants examined five witnesses in their defence.
6. Learned trial Court, vide impugned judgment/order dated 16.1.2019, ordered the conviction and sentence of the appellants as under:-
::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2022 20:11:01 :::CIS 41. Appellant, Raj Kumar.
1. 354-A IPC Rigorous imprisonment In default of payment of fine for three years and fine amount, to further undergo of Rs.10,000/- simple imprisonment for three months.
.
2. 376(2)(f) IPC Imprisonment for life and In default of payment of fine fine of Rs.50,000/- amount, to further undergo simple imprisonment for one year.
3. 506 IPC Rigorous imprisonment In default of payment of fine for seven years and fine amount, to further undergo of Rs.25,000/- simple imprisonment for six months.
4. Section 6 of Imprisonment for life and In default of payment of fine POCSO Act fine of Rs.50,000/- amount, to further undergo simple imprisonment for one year.
5. Section 12 Rigorous imprisonment In default of payment if fine of POCSO for three years and fine amount, to further undergo Act of Rs.20,000/- simple imprisonment for three months.
2.
Appellant, Sardar Singh
1. 202 IPC Rigorous imprisonment In default of payment of fine for six months and fine amount, to further undergo of Rs.5,000/- simple imprisonment for three months.
2. 21(2) of Rigorous imprisonment In default of payment of fine POCSO Act for one year and fine of amount, to further undergo Rs.10,000/- simple imprisonment for three months.
7. Learned counsel for appellant, Raj Kumar, has submitted that the appellant had been falsely involved in this case. There was un- explained delay in lodging the FIR.
8. Learned counsel for appellant Sardar Singh, has submitted that the said appellant had been falsely involved in this case. The appellant had no role to play in the alleged offences.
9. Learned Deputy Advocate General, on the other hand, has opposed the appeals and has submitted that the offence committed by ::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2022 20:11:01 :::CIS 5 the appellants, is serious and heinous in nature. Prosecution witnesses have fully supported the prosecution case.
10. Present case relates to the offence of sexual assault committed .
by appellant Raj Kumar vis-à-vis minor girl students of the school. So far as, appellant Sardar Singh is concerned, allegation against him is that he had failed to report the offence committed by appellant Raj Kumar, although, the offence committed by appellant Raj Kumar, was within his knowledge.
11. In order to prove its case, prosecution examined the victims as PW-1 to PW-8. r
12. PW-1, who is the victim aged about 11 years, deposed that the appellant had called her in the room and the other children were sitting outside the room. Appellant Raj Kumar opened the zip of his pant and had also opened her Salwar. The appellant had inserted his finger in her private part and threatened her that she should not disclose the incident to anybody. After inserting finger in her private part, he also kissed her. She further deposed that on another day, appellant had given her sweets and thereafter she had suffered headache. At that time, she was student of 4th standard. The appellant used to call her to the room of 3rd Class and had repeated the acts.
13. PW-2, who is the victim aged about 9 years, deposed that appellant Raj Kumar used to insert his penis in her mouth as well as 7/8 girls of the school and used to kiss them. Appellant used to discharge white fluid in their mouth. At that time, she was a student of ::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2022 20:11:01 :::CIS 6 3rd Class. The appellant had repeated the acts about 7-8 times. She had not disclosed the incident to anyone as the appellant had threatened them. When she was promoted to 4th Class, then one girl .
student informed the acts committed by the appellant to madam, Savita.
14. PW-3, who is another victim aged about 9 years, deposed that appellant Raj Kumar was their Class Teacher in 3rd Class. He used to kiss her and used to insert his penis in her mouth. He used to call her in the room when no other person was there. He used to sit on a chair and used to open his zip.
r He had done this act with her on two occasions and had threatened her not to disclose this act to anybody.
15. PW-4, who is another victim aged about 9 years, deposed that she was a student of 3rd Class and appellant Raj Kumar used to insert his penis in her mouth and her private part. Appellant used to discharge white substance in her mouth. Appellant had done the said act on 7-8 occasions. The appellant used to call her in the room of 3rd Class. He used to make other children sit outside the room. Appellant also used to kiss her on her cheeks and lips and had threatened her that she should not disclose the said incident to anyone. All the children had informed the said incident to Savita madam prior to reaching the police.
16. PW-5, who is another victim aged about 9 years, deposed that appellant used to call her in the room of 3rd Class and the other children used to sit outside the room. Appellant asked her to rub his ::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2022 20:11:01 :::CIS 7 penis with her hands and when she refused, he forcibly rubbed his penis with her hands. On one occasion, appellant had taken her to a newly constructed house near the school and inserted his penis in her .
mouth and asked her to swallow the white discharge, but she had spitted out the same. She had not disclosed the said incident to anybody as the appellant had threatened her.
17. PW-6, who is another victim aged about 8 years, deposed that the appellant Raj Kumar was their Class Teacher and he had called her in the Classroom and had asked her to shut her eyes and had inserted his penis in her mouth. Appellant had done this act with her on 8 occasions and had threatened her that she should not disclose the incident to anybody.
18. PW-7, who is another victim aged 8 years, deposed that appellant Raj Kumar used to do wrong acts with her and used to call her in the room of 3rd Class. Appellant had opened his zip and had rubbed his penis with his own hands and thereafter asked her to rub his penis. When she inquired that why he was doing so, he told that he had sustained some injuries on his penis and thereafter when she rubbed his penis, a white substance came out and he kept the same in a box. Appellant had threatened her that she should not disclose the incident to anybody. When she had refused to attend the school, her mother had visited the school and appellant apologized and thereafter he had started beating her in the school.
::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2022 20:11:01 :::CIS 819. PW-8, who is another victim aged about 8 years, deposed that appellant Raj Kumar used to do indecent acts with 7-8 girls in the school. Appellant had called her inside the room of 3rd Class.
.
Appellant had given beatings to her with a stick (Danda). Two other girls were also present there with her. Appellant had shown his private part to her, but she had covered her eyes with her hands. Then, appellant had told her that his private part had slipped out as there was some fault in his zip.
20. Thus, the victims who are minor girls had appeared in the witness box during trial and had supported the prosecution case to the effect that appellant Raj Kumar used to sexually assault them. The statements of the victims, being natural, inspire confidence and all the witnesses have withstood the test of cross-examination.
21. So far as the complainant, Chaman Singh is concerned, he appeared in the witness box as PW-9 and had deposed as per contents of the FIR.
22. PW-10, Vijay Kumar, father of victim-PW-2, has deposed that his daughter, on 12.10.2015, had told him that appellant Raj Kumar used to touch her breast and anus. There was a complaint against the accused from other parents also and the matter was reported to the School Head Teacher.
23. PW-11, Ram Kali, mother of PW-1, has not supported the prosecution case.
::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2022 20:11:01 :::CIS 924. PW-12, Rani Devi, mother of PW-4, has deposed that on 16.10.2015, she had gone to the school of her daughter and found that appellant Raj Kumar was in the habit of inserting his penis in the mouth .
of the girl students in the school and used to sexually assault the victims. Statement of her daughter was recorded by the Police.
25. PW-13, Nisha, mother of PW-6, has deposed that her daughter had disclosed to the Police in her presence that appellant Raj Kumar used to insert his penis in the mouth of her daughter. Parents of all the victim girls were present in the school. Children used to sit in the verandah and the appellant used to call the girl students in the room on the pretext of studies and used to threaten the children not to disclose the incident to their parents as he had affixed cameras in their homes.
All the girls who are victims had given their statements to the Police in her presence.
26. PW-14, Jyoti, mother of PW-8 has deposed that in the month of August, 2015, her daughter had told her that she was having pain in her stomach and had refused to attend the school. When she asked her time and again, she disclosed that appellant Raj Kumar used to tease her by showing his penis to her. The matter was reported by her mother-in-law to appellant Sardar Singh, who had scolded appellant Raj Kumar. On the next day, she went to the school with Kanta and told appellant Sardar Singh about the behavior of appellant Raj Kumar.
On her oral complaint, a compromise (Ex.PW14/A) was effected and appellant Raj Kumar had undertaken not to repeat the wrong acts.
::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2022 20:11:01 :::CIS 1027. PW-15, Dr. Minakshi, deposed that she had medico legally examined victim PW-1 and she found that her hymen was ruptured. As per her opinion, there was nothing to suggest that vaginal penetration .
has not taken place. On that day, she had also examined victim, PW-4 and it was found that her hymen was also ruptured. As per her opinion, there was nothing to suggest that vaginal penetration has not taken place.
28. PW-18 Babita Rani, PW-19 Vijay Kumar and PW-20 Naval Kishor, have proved on record the Birth Certificates of the victims.
29. PW-21 Savita Sharma deposed that she was posted as Junior Basic Teacher (JBT) in Government Primary School, Awan. Appellant, Sardar Singh was the Center Head Teacher of their school. After transfer of appellant, Sardar Singh from their school, Chaman Singh had joined as Center Head Teacher. A month prior to registration of the case, on 14.1.2015, Center Head Teacher, Chaman Singh had inquired from her about the complaint against appellant Raj Kumar and she had shown her ignorance regarding any obscene behavior of appellant Raj Kumar with the children. Thereafter, she had inquired from the children as well as their parents and the children disclosed about the indecent behavior of the appellant Raj Kumar and the matter was reported to the Police. 8 children leveled allegations of sexual assault against appellant Raj Kumar.
::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2022 20:11:01 :::CIS 1130. PW-22 Neeta deposed that she was a Counselor of Child Help Line. All the statements of the victims (girls) were recorded in her presence.
.
31. PW-23 Surinder Singh had not supported the prosecution case.
PW-24 Raman Bali has proved the appointment and posting orders of the appellants. Statement of PW-24 is corroborated by PW-25 Man Singh with regard to posting of the appellants.
32. The remaining witnesses are the Police Officials who have deposed with regard to the investigation conducted by them.
33. Complainant, Chaman Singh has also been examined as DW-1 and he deposed that no departmental inquiry was held against appellant Raj Kumar. As per the School Management Committee meeting register maintained in the school, on 13.10.2014, a dispute had arisen between Kayan Devi and Shakuntla Devi and both of them were directed to perform their duties properly.
34. DW-2 Seema Kumari deposed that she did not know regarding any quarrel which took place between the Cooks.
35. DW-3 Kanta Devi deposed that she did not know appellant Raj Kumar.
36. DW-4 Kayan Devi deposed that she was working as a Cook in Government Central Primary School, Awan. A dispute had arisen between her and Shakuntla, who was a helper, regarding washing of utensils in October, 2014. She had never threatened appellant Raj ::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2022 20:11:01 :::CIS 12 Kumar to implicate him in a false case. She did not know what had happened in the School Management Committee meeting.
37. DW-5 Relmo Devi deposed that she was working as a Peon in .
Government Central Primary School, Awan. She knew appellant Raj Kumar. She used to serve water to Teachers and Officials. In her cross-examination, she admitted that a complaint had been made by the victims. The victims had narrated the incident to their parents and, thereafter, the matter was reported to the school authorities by the parents. 8 girl students had leveled allegations against appellant Raj Kumar that he had been doing indecent acts with them.
38. The present case has to be examined in the light of the evidence brought on record by the prosecution mentioned above to come to a conclusion, as to whether the appellants are guilty of the charges framed against them or not.
39. Section 375 of the IPC reads as under:-
"[375. Rape.--A man is said to commit "rape" if he-
(a) penetrates his penis, to any extent, into the vagina, mouth, urethra or anus of a woman or makes her to do so with him or any other person; or
(b) inserts, to any extent, any object or a part of the body, not being the penis, into the vagina, the urethra or anus of a woman or makes her to do so with him or any other person; or
(c) Manipulates any part of the body of a woman so as to cause penetration into the vagina, urethra, anus ::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2022 20:11:01 :::CIS 13 or any part of the body of such woman or makes her to do so with him or any other person; or
(d) Applies his mouth to the vagina, anus, urethra of a woman or makes her to do so with him or any other .
person, Under the circumstances falling under any of the following seven descriptions:-
First -- Against her will.
Secondly --Without her consent.
Thirdly -- With her consent, when her consent has been obtained by putting her or any person in whom she is interested, in fear of death r or of hurt.
Fourthly --With her consent, when the man knows that he is not her husband, and that her consent is given because she believes that he is another man to whom she is or believes herself to be lawfully married.
Fifthly -- With her consent, when, at the time of
giving such consent, by reason of
unsoundness of mind or intoxication or the administration by him personally or through another of any stupefying or unwholesome substance, she is unable to understand the nature and consequences of that to which she gives consent.
Sixthly -- With or without her consent, when she is under sixteen years of age.
Seventhly- When she is unable to communicate consent.
::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2022 20:11:01 :::CIS 14Explanation 1.--For the purposes of this section, "vagina" shall also include labia majora.
Explanation 2. .--Consent means an unequivocal voluntary agreement when the woman by words, .
gestures or any form of verbal or non-verbal communication, communicates willingness to participate in the specific sexual act:
Provided that a woman who does not physically resist to the act of penetration shall not by the reason only of that fact, be regarded as consenting to the sexual activity.
Exception 1. .--A medical procedure or intervention shall not constitute rape.
Exception 2. .--Sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under fifteen years of age, is not rape.]"
40. Section 5 of the POCSO Act reads as under:-
"5. Aggravated penetrative sexual assault xxx xxx xxx
(f) Whoever being on the management or staff of an educational institution or religious institution, commits penetrative sexual assault on a child in that institution; or xxx xxx xxx
(l) whoever, taking advantage of a child's mental or physical disability, commits penetrative sexual assault on the child; or
(m) whoever commits penetrative sexual assault on a child below twelve years; or xxx xxx xxx"::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2022 20:11:01 :::CIS 15
41. So far as appellant Raj Kumar is concerned, from the testimony of all the victims as well as medical evidence relating to two victims, it stands duly established that appellant Raj Kumar was guilty of offence .
of rape as well as penetrative sexual assault. The victims are young minor girls and were virtually in the guardianship of appellant Raj Kumar. Appellant Raj Kumar was the Teacher of the victims.
Appellant Raj Kumar was required to protect the victims and ensure that they were safe and well protected in the school. However, appellant Raj Kumar had betrayed the trust and had become violator.
The sanctity of the relationship of the Teacher and students has been polluted. The offence committed by appellant Raj Kumar is heinous. It is a sad reflection on the present day society where a most platonic relationship has been exploited by appellant Raj Kumar. The victims were young minor girls and did not immediately report the bad acts/offence committed by appellant Raj Kumar to their family members as they had been threatened by appellant Raj Kumar.
42. The witnesses examined by appellant Raj Kumar in his defence fail to advance his case. Rather, DW-5, who was working in the school as a Peon, in her cross-examination, has also deposed to the effect that allegations had been leveled against the appellant by 8 girl students of the school that he had done indecent acts with them. She further volunteered, that if the girl students had leveled allegations, the same must be correct.
::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2022 20:11:01 :::CIS 1643. Since the prosecution had been successful in establishing its case against appellant Raj Kumar, learned trial Court had rightly ordered the conviction and sentence of appellant Raj Kumar with .
regard to the charges framed against him. Keeping in view the seriousness of the allegations leveled against appellant Raj Kumar, no ground for reduction of sentence is made out. Although, learned counsel for appellant Raj Kumar has submitted that the appellant has to support his wife and children and the quantum of sentence be reduced, but we are not persuaded to accept the said argument raised by learned counsel for appellant Raj Kumar.
44. Accordingly, the appeal filed by appellant Raj Kumar, i.e., Criminal Appeal No.142 of 2019 is dismissed and the judgment/order dated 16.1.2019, passed by Special Judge, Chamba Division, District Chamba, H.P., in Sessions Trial No.57 of 2015, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Raj Kumar and another, whereby learned trial Court had ordered conviction and sentence of appellant Raj Kumar, are upheld.
45. So far as appellant Sardar Singh is concerned, the allegation against him is that he was Center Head Teacher at the relevant time and despite knowledge, he had failed to take action against appellant Raj Kumar as per law. In this regard, PW-14 had deposed that she had narrated the behavior of appellant Raj Kumar to appellant Sardar Singh. Compromise (Ex.PW-14/A) was effected in this regard. A perusal of compromise (Ex.PW-14/A) reveals that Jyoti Devi and Kanta ::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2022 20:11:01 :::CIS 17 Devi had stated that they were condoning the acts of appellant, Raj Kumar, but in case he commits any wrong act in future, then he would be responsible for the same. The said document is dated 4.8.2015.
.
46. Ex.PW29/A is another letter which is duly signed by both the appellants. Perusal of the said document reveals that on 3.8.2015, girl students of 3rd Class had told the Center Head Teacher, appellant Sardar Singh that appellant Raj Kumar had been doing wrong acts with them. The said acts had been continuing prior to summer vacation.
The students narrated that the appellant Raj Kumar used to sit in Class room after removing his clothes and used to do obscene acts.
Appellant Sardar Singh had mentioned in the document that even he himself was astonished to hear about the incident. Therefore, appellant Raj Kumar was asked to give his explanation. On 6.8.2015, appellant Raj Kumar was given a warning. The said document is Ex.PW29/B and bears the signatures of both the appellants. As per Ex.PX, report of the Forensic Science Laboratory, the questioned signatures of the appellants matched with their specimen signatures.
47. Thus, appellant Sardar Singh came to know about the wrong acts committed by appellant Raj Kumar in August, 2015, but he had failed to report the matter to the concerned authorities. It is only in October, 2015, FIR was lodged against appellant Raj Kumar by the new Center Head Teacher, Chaman Singh.
48. Section 19 of POCSO Act reads as under:-
"Reporting of offences ::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2022 20:11:01 :::CIS 18 (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), any person (including the child), who has apprehension that an offence under this Act is likely to be committed or .
has knowledge that such an offence has been committed, he shall provide such information to,-
(a) the Special Juvenile Police Unit; or
(b) the local police.
(2) Every report given under sub-section (1) shall be-
(a) ascribed an entry number and recorded in writing;
(b) be read over to the informant;
(c) shall be entered in a book to be kept by the Police Unit.
(3) Where the report under sub-section (1) is given by a child, the same shall be recorded under sub-section (2) in a simple language so that the child understands contents being recorded.
(4) In case contents are being recorded in the language not understood by the child or wherever it is deemed necessary, a translator or an interpreter, having such qualifications, experience and on payment of such fees as may be prescribed, shall be provided to the child if he fails to understand the same. (5) Where the Special Juvenile Police Unit or local police is satisfied that the child against whom an offence has been committed is in need of care and protection, then, it shall, after recording the reasons in writing, make immediate arrangement to give him such care and protection (including admitting the child into shelter home or to the nearest hospital) ::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2022 20:11:01 :::CIS 19 within twenty-four hours of the report, as may be prescribed.
(6) The Special Juvenile Police Unit or local police shall, without unnecessary delay but within a period of .
twenty-four hours, report the matter to the Child Welfare Committee and the Special Court or where no Special Court has been designated, to the Court of Session, including need of the child for care and protection and steps taken in this regard.
(7) No person shall incur any liability, whether civil or criminal, for giving the information in good faith for the purpose of sub-section(1)."
49. Section 21 of the POCSO Act reads as under:-
"Punishment for failure to report or record a case (1) Any person, who fails to report the commission of an offence under sub-section (1) of section 19 or section 20 or who fails to record such offence under sub-section(2) of section 19 shall be punished with imprisonment of either description which may extend to six months or with fine or with both.
(2) Any person, being in-charge of any company or an institution (by whatever name called), who fails to report the commission of an offence under sub-section (1) of section 19 in respect of a subordinate under his control, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extent to one year and with fine. (3) The provisions of sub-section (1) shall not apply to a child under this Act."::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2022 20:11:01 :::CIS 20
50. Section 202 of the IPC reads as under:-
"202. Intentional omission to give information of offence by person bound to inform.- Whoever, .
knowing or having reason to believe that an offence has been committed, intentionally omits to give any information respecting that offence which he is legally bound to give, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with both."
51. Thus, as per the above provisions of the Act, in case a person, who has knowledge that an offence has taken place under the Act, but fails to report the matter, he is liable for punishment. The offence committed by appellant Raj Kumar was serious and heinous in nature and non-reporting of the said offence renders the appellant Sardar Singh for punishment under Section 21 of the POCSO Act.
Thus, appellant Sardar Singh was rightly convicted qua offence punishable under Section 202 of the IPC and Section 21(2) of the POCSO Act. We are not persuaded to accept the argument of learned counsel to the effect that the sentence of the said appellant be reduced. Appellant Sardar Singh was sentenced to undergo one year imprisonment under Section 21(2) of the POCSO Act. The said punishment does not require any reduction keeping in view the nature of allegations leveled against appellant Sardar Singh.
52. Consequently, appeal filed by appellant Sardar Singh, i.e., Criminal Appeal No.23 of 2019, is dismissed. Accordingly, ::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2022 20:11:01 :::CIS 21 judgment/order dated 16.1.2019, passed by Special Judge, Chamba Division, District Chamba, H.P., in Sessions Trial No.57 of 2015, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Raj Kumar and another, against .
appellant Sardar Singh, are upheld.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
( Sabina )
Judge
( Satyen Vaidya)
r Judge
March 21st, 2022 (ks)
::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2022 20:11:01 :::CIS