Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Kishor Shankar Palve, was convicted by the Special Court and Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar, for offences under Section 3 punishable under Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) and Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). He was also convicted under Section 366A IPC and Section 363 IPC, but no separate sentences were awarded. The prosecution case was that on 05.03.2014, the victim, a 16-year-old girl, left home for her 10th standard examination but did not reach school. Her father lodged a missing report, and later it was discovered that the appellant, who was known to the victim, had taken her away under the pretext of marriage. The victim was recovered on 07.03.2014, and her statement under Section 164 CrPC was recorded. The trial court convicted the appellant based on the victim's testimony. On appeal, the High Court examined the evidence and found material inconsistencies in the victim's deposition regarding the place where the alleged sexual assault occurred and the manner in which it happened. The medical evidence did not corroborate the victim's claim of penetrative sexual assault. The court also noted that the victim's age was not conclusively proved, and there was no independent witness to support the prosecution's case. The High Court held that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt, and accordingly allowed the appeal, setting aside the conviction and acquitting the appellant.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape and POCSO - Benefit of Doubt - Inconsistencies in Victim's Testimony - The appellant was convicted under Section 3/4 of POCSO Act and Section 376 IPC for alleged penetrative sexual assault of a minor. The High Court found material contradictions in the victim's testimony regarding the place and manner of the alleged incident, and lack of corroboration by medical evidence or other witnesses. Held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, and the appellant is entitled to acquittal (Paras 1-20).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 3 punishable under Section 4 of the POCSO Act and Section 376 of IPC is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted of all charges. Bail bonds cancelled.
Law Points
- Benefit of doubt
- Inconsistencies in testimony
- Lack of corroboration
- Age determination
- Consent in POCSO cases
- Standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt
