Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Royston Xavier Parera, was convicted by the Special Judge under the POCSO Act for offences under Sections 4 & 10 of the POCSO Act and Section 376(2) IPC, and sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment. The victim, a 15-year-old girl, alleged that the appellant inappropriately touched her on 16.06.2015 and continued such acts until 31.07.2015. The FIR was lodged on 27.09.2015. The High Court, on appeal, examined the evidence. The victim's testimony was found to be inconsistent and lacking corroboration. The mother's testimony was also inconsistent and she was an interested witness. The delay in filing the FIR was not explained. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt and acquitted the appellant, giving him the benefit of doubt.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Sexual Offences - POCSO Act - Benefit of Doubt - Inconsistent Testimony - The appellant was convicted for sexual assault under Sections 4 & 10 of POCSO Act and Section 376(2) IPC. The High Court found the victim's testimony inconsistent, uncorroborated, and the FIR delayed without explanation. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt and acquitted the appellant. (Paras 1-12) B) Evidence Law - Witness Testimony - Interested Witness - The victim's mother (PW-2) was an interested witness and her testimony was not corroborated by independent evidence. The court noted that the mother's conduct of slapping the victim and not reporting the incident immediately raised doubts. (Paras 8-10) C) Criminal Procedure - Delay in FIR - The FIR was lodged on 27.09.2015 for incidents occurring between June and July 2015. The delay of over two months was not satisfactorily explained, casting doubt on the prosecution case. (Para 7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 4 & 10 of the POCSO Act and Section 376(2) IPC is sustainable in law 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
- Inconsistent testimony
- Lack of corroboration
- Delay in FIR
- Interested witnesses
- POCSO Act
- Section 376 IPC
