Case Note & Summary
The appellants, Kisan Damaji Naik and Ramesh Abidas Vasave, were convicted by the Sessions Judge, Nandurbar, in Sessions Case No. 01/2018 for offences under Sections 376(1), 341, 506, 109 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 4, 12, 17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. They appealed against the conviction. The prosecution case was that on 14th December 2017, the victim, a 16-year-old girl, was taken by Soham Guru Naik and Rahul on a motorcycle to a forest area where Soham allegedly raped her. The appellants were not present at the scene but were charged with abetment. The victim initially named only Soham and Rahul, but later implicated the appellants. The High Court found that the victim's testimony was inconsistent and unreliable. The medical evidence showed no signs of rape, and the victim's hymen was intact. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal was allowed, the conviction was set aside, and the appellants were acquitted.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape and POCSO - Appreciation of Evidence - Inconsistent Testimony - The victim's testimony was found to be inconsistent and unreliable, as she initially stated she was taken to the forest by Soham and Rahul, but later claimed the appellants were involved. The medical evidence did not support rape. Held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt (Paras 10-15). B) Criminal Law - POCSO Act - Penetrative Sexual Assault - Section 4 POCSO Act - The medical report showed no signs of recent sexual intercourse, and the victim's hymen was intact. Held that the essential ingredient of penetration was not established (Paras 12-13). C) Criminal Law - Abetment - Sections 109 IPC and 17 POCSO Act - The prosecution failed to prove any act of abetment by the appellants. The victim's statement did not implicate them in any overt act. Held that the conviction for abetment was unsustainable (Paras 14-15).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Sections 376(1), 341, 506, 109 IPC and Sections 4, 12, 17 of the POCSO Act is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. The impugned judgment and order of conviction dated 30.04.2019 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Nandurbar in Sessions Case No. 01/2018 is set aside. The appellants are acquitted of all charges. Their bail bonds stand cancelled.
Law Points
- Conviction based on uncorroborated testimony of a child witness must be scrutinized with caution
- Inconsistencies in victim's statement and medical evidence lead to benefit of doubt
- Section 376(1) IPC requires proof of penetrative sexual assault
- Section 4 POCSO Act requires penetrative sexual assault on a child
- Section 12 POCSO Act requires sexual harassment
- Section 17 POCSO Act requires abetment
- Section 109 IPC requires abetment
- Section 341 IPC requires wrongful restraint
- Section 506 IPC requires criminal intimidation
