Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Ganpati Shankar Kage, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Omerga in Special Case No.18 of 2021 for offences under Sections 376, 323, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 4, 6, 8, 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. The victim, his 15-year-old daughter, lodged a report on 29-04-2021 alleging that on the night of 28-04-2021, her father, under the influence of liquor, called her into a room, threatened her with an axe, disrobed her, and raped her. She immediately fled to her uncle's house and informed her grandparents. The next day, she and her uncle went to the police station and lodged the FIR, leading to the registration of Crime No.93 of 2021. Investigation was conducted by PW9 Kawade, who filed a charge sheet. The trial court convicted the appellant, and he appealed. The appellant's counsel argued that the victim's testimony was not credible, that her age was not conclusively proved, that medical evidence was inconclusive, and that the brother who was present was not examined. The State argued that the prosecution had established its case through ten witnesses, that the victim's testimony was credible, that her age was proved by school records, and that medical evidence was positive. The High Court, after examining the evidence, held that the victim's testimony was consistent and credible, that her age was proved as 15 years through school leaving certificate and birth certificate, and that medical evidence, though not conclusive, did not discredit the prosecution case. The court found that the trial court had properly appreciated the evidence and law, and dismissed the appeal, upholding the conviction and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life and fine.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault - Sections 376, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 4, 6, 8, 12 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Conviction based on sole testimony of victim - Appeal against conviction by father for raping his 15-year-old daughter - Held that the testimony of the victim is credible and inspires confidence, and medical evidence is not a sine qua non for proving rape (Paras 1-10). B) Evidence Law - Age of Victim - Proof of Age - Section 94 Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 - School leaving certificate and birth certificate - Held that the age of the victim was conclusively proved as 15 years through school records and birth certificate (Paras 2-5). C) Criminal Law - Sentencing - Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault - Minimum Sentence - Section 6 POCSO Act - Conviction for rape of own daughter - Held that the trial court correctly imposed rigorous imprisonment for life and fine, and no interference is warranted (Para 10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 376, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 4, 6, 8, 12 of the POCSO Act is sustainable based on the sole testimony of the victim and other evidence.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. Conviction and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life and fine under Sections 376 IPC and 6 POCSO Act upheld.
Law Points
- Sole testimony of victim
- if credible
- can sustain conviction in sexual offences
- Age of victim can be proved by school records
- Medical evidence not mandatory for proving rape
- POCSO Act provisions for aggravated penetrative sexual assault
