Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

In the case in hand, after culmination of investigation, the charge sheet has been submitted under Section 376 IPC and 4/6/8 of POCSO Act, but the learned Additional Sessions Judge has wrongly mentioned section 5(d)/6 of POCSO Act in the charge, which in my opinion does not amount to failure of justice.

In this case, I find that the learned Additional Sessions Judge has inadvertently referred to Section 5(d)/6 of POCSO Act instead of section 5(m)/6 of the POCSO Act, which actually had come to play for the offence. What, however, important is that the appellant was charged in unequivocal terms.

Learned Additional Government Advocate supported the finding recorded by the Trial Court and has submitted that the entire prosecution story is well proved through testimony of victim PW-1, her mother informant Smt. Vidya Devi PW-2 and elder sister Kumari Ranjna PW-3. It has further submitted that the accused-appellant was known to the victim and informant from before as he was resident of the same village. It was next submitted that the victim was about 7 years of age and there is no contradictions in the prosecution evidence. It was also submitted that the circumstances as also the link evidence which are sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused-appellant for the charges levelled against him. Lastly, it was submitted that trial Court has committed no error in recording the findings of guilt against accused-appellant for the offences punishable under Section 376 I.P.C. and under Section 5(d)/6 POCSO Act and appropriate sentence has been awarded to the accused-appellant.
In view of the above discussions, I find that the statements of the victim PW-1, Smt. Vidya Devi, PW-2 and Km. Ranjna PW-3 not only corroborate each other and also are consistent with first information report and also with the medical evidence including documentary evidence on record. The trial Court has correctly appreciated the evidence and has not erred in convicting and sentencing the accused-appellant for the offences punishable under Section 376 I.P.C. and under Section 5(d)/6 POCSO Act.

6. Punishment for aggravated penetrative sexual assault.- Whoever, commits aggravated penetrative sexual assault, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years but which may extend to imprisonment for life and shall also be liable to fine.

In the present case the learned trial Court has convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant under Section 376 I.P.C. and under Section 5(d)/6 POCSO Act and minimum sentence has been awarded to him. According to the statement of Dr. Seema Rai PW-4 and medical examination report Exhibit Ka-4, external genitalia of the victim was swollen and abrasions were present. Redness was also present around her vulva. Victim had told to the doctor that the accused-appellant had put his one finger in her vulva. Victim has also deposed that on the date of incident accused-appellant has inserted his finger into her private parts. It is not disputed that at the time of incident victim was only six years of age. Her testimony is fully supported and corroborated with the statement of her mother Smt. Vidya Devi PW-2 and her elder sister Km. Ranjna PW-3 as well as medical report. Injuries were also found on private parts of the victim. In the absence of any material discrepancies or inconsistencies and infirmities, the aforesaid prosecution witnesses cannot be disbelieved. We find that the statement of the victim PW-1, informant Smt. Vidya Devi PW-2 and Km. Ranjna PW-3 not only corroborate one another but also consistent with the first information report as also the documentary evidence including medical evidence available on record. The evidence on record is sufficient to affirm the guilt of the accused-appellant on the charges framed against him. Hence, the accused-appellant is not entitled to the benefit of doubt as pleaded by him. After considering the entirety of the case, I do not find any cogent reason to interfere with the findings of the fact recorded by the trial Court.