Case Note & Summary
The case arises from an appeal filed by the prosecutrix (victim) under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment and order dated 07.11.2019 passed by the learned Special Court under the POCSO Act and Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad in Special Case Child Prot. No.62/2015. The trial court had acquitted respondent Nos.2 and 3 (original accused Nos.1 and 2) for offences punishable under Sections 363, 366-A, 376(2)(i) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. The prosecution story is that on 14.11.2014, the victim's mother lodged a report alleging that on 11.11.2014, her minor daughter (victim) went missing from outside her foster sister's house. After 2-3 days, she learned that the accused had enticed away her daughter on the promise of marriage. Crime No.I-218/2014 was registered. During investigation, it was revealed that the victim had a love affair with accused No.1 for two years, and on 12.11.2014, the step-mother of accused No.1 consented to their marriage and permitted them to stay together, where they developed physical relations. The trial court acquitted the accused, leading to this appeal. The legal issues considered were whether the consent of a minor is relevant and whether the victim's testimony is credible. The court held that the consent of a minor is irrelevant and the victim's testimony, being consistent and credible, is sufficient to convict. The court set aside the acquittal and convicted the accused under Sections 363, 366-A, 376(2)(i) read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Kidnapping and Rape - Consent of Minor - Irrelevant - The court held that the consent of a minor girl is immaterial and cannot be a defence for kidnapping or rape. The victim's testimony, if credible, is sufficient to convict. (Paras 10-15) B) Criminal Law - POCSO Act - Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault - Section 6 - The court held that sexual intercourse with a minor below 16 years constitutes aggravated penetrative sexual assault under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012, irrespective of consent. (Paras 16-20) C) Evidence Law - Testimony of Victim - Credibility - Minor Inconsistencies - The court held that minor contradictions in the victim's testimony do not discredit her if the core version is consistent and trustworthy. (Paras 21-25)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the acquittal of the accused for offences under Sections 363, 366-A, 376(2)(i) read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The judgment and order of acquittal dated 07.11.2019 passed by the Special Court under POCSO Act and Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad in Special Case Child Prot. No.62/2015 is set aside. The accused are convicted for offences under Sections 363, 366-A, 376(2)(i) read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act. The matter is remitted to the trial court for sentencing.
Law Points
- Consent of minor is irrelevant
- Testimony of victim is credible
- Acquittal set aside
- POCSO Act
- 2012
- Indian Penal Code
- 1860
