Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Vitthal Rajendra Jogade, was convicted by the Special Judge, Solapur, under Section 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 4 and 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), and sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment. The victim was an 11-year-old girl with a leg handicap. On 22 April 2014, during summer vacation, the victim's mother called the appellant to connect cable TV at their newly constructed house. While the appellant was working, the mother left with a neighbor to go to the agricultural field, leaving the victim alone with the appellant. The prosecution alleged that the appellant then committed sexual assault on the victim. The victim's mother returned and found the victim crying; the victim disclosed the incident. The appellant was arrested and charged. The trial court convicted him based on the victim's testimony and other evidence. The appellant appealed to the Bombay High Court. The High Court examined the evidence, noting inconsistencies in the victim's testimony, including improvements and contradictions with her earlier statements. The medical evidence did not show any signs of sexual assault. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act was rebutted by the lack of credible evidence. The court acquitted the appellant, setting aside the conviction and sentence.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Appreciation of Evidence - Sexual Offences - Conviction based on sole testimony of victim - The court examined the reliability of the victim's testimony and found inconsistencies and improvements, making it unsafe to convict solely on her evidence. Held that conviction cannot be sustained without corroboration where testimony is shaky (Paras 10-15). B) Criminal Law - Medical Evidence - Sexual Assault - Absence of injuries - The medical evidence did not show any signs of sexual assault or injuries on the victim's private parts. Held that medical evidence is not conclusive but can be used to test the veracity of the prosecution case (Paras 16-18). C) Criminal Law - Child Witness - POCSO Act - Presumption under Section 29 - The presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act is rebuttable and does not absolve the prosecution of proving its case beyond reasonable doubt. Held that the presumption cannot be used to fill gaps in evidence (Paras 19-21).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 376(2)(i) IPC and Sections 4 and 10 of the POCSO Act is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and order dated 13 January 2016 is set aside. The appellant is acquitted of all charges. He shall be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Appreciation of evidence in sexual offences
- Corroboration of victim testimony
- Standard of proof in criminal cases
- Presumption under POCSO Act
- Reliability of child witness
