Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Sunil Sable, was convicted by the Special Judge under POCSO Act, Dhule, for offences under Section 4 of the POCSO Act and Sections 376(1)(2)(i), 341, 506 IPC. The prosecution alleged that on 24.08.2015, the appellant forcibly raped a 14-year-old girl after obstructing her way when she went to answer nature's call. The victim's father lodged an FIR after the victim disclosed the incident to her mother. The trial court convicted the appellant based on the victim's testimony and presumption under Section 29 of POCSO Act. In appeal, the High Court examined the evidence and found that the medical evidence did not support rape, as the hymen was intact and no injuries were found. The victim's age was also doubtful as the ossification test suggested she was between 16-18 years. The court noted inconsistencies in the victim's testimony and lack of corroboration. The court held that the presumption under Section 29 is rebuttable and the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal was allowed, conviction set aside, and the appellant was acquitted.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - POCSO Act - Section 4 POCSO Act, Section 376 IPC - Conviction set aside - Appeal against conviction under Section 4 of POCSO Act and Section 376 IPC - Prosecution case based on victim's testimony but medical evidence did not support rape - Victim's age doubtful - Inconsistencies in evidence - Held that prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, benefit of doubt given to accused (Paras 1-20).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 4 of POCSO Act and Section 376 IPC is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction set aside. Appellant acquitted of all charges.
Law Points
- Presumption under Section 29 of POCSO Act is rebuttable
- Medical evidence inconsistent with rape
- Delay in FIR not fatal if explained
- Benefit of doubt to accused
