Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Mahadeo @ Nana Gundiba Khandale, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati in Special (POCSO) Case No.8/2015 for offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and the Indian Penal Code. The victim was a 4-year-old girl, a distant relative of the appellant. The incident allegedly occurred on 28.11.2014 when the victim went to the appellant's shop. The victim's mother reported the matter to the police, and the appellant was arrested. The trial court convicted the appellant under Section 6 of POCSO Act read with Section 376(2)(i) IPC, and under Sections 4, 8, and 12 of POCSO Act, sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment for ten years, seven years, three years, and one year respectively, with fines. The appellant appealed to the Bombay High Court. The High Court heard the appeal and examined the evidence. The court found that the victim's testimony was inconsistent and contained material contradictions. The victim initially stated that the appellant inserted his finger into her private part, but later improved her version to include penile penetration. The medical evidence did not show any signs of sexual assault, and the doctor could not give a definite opinion. The court also noted that the other prosecution witnesses, including the victim's mother and grandmother, were not present at the scene and their testimony was hearsay. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellant.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Appreciation of Evidence - Inconsistencies in Victim Testimony - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Sections 4, 6, 8, 12; Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 376(2)(i) - The victim's testimony contained material contradictions and improvements, and was not corroborated by medical evidence or other witnesses. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, and the conviction was set aside (Paras 1-17). B) Criminal Law - Age of Victim - Determination - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - The victim's date of birth was 18.5.2010, making her 4 years old at the time of incident. However, the court noted that the age was not seriously disputed and the case proceeded on that basis (Para 3). C) Criminal Law - Medical Evidence - Lack of Corroboration - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - The medical examination did not reveal any signs of sexual assault, and the doctor's opinion was that no definite opinion could be given. The court held that the medical evidence did not support the prosecution case (Para 10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under the POCSO Act and IPC was sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted.
Law Points
- Appreciation of evidence in sexual offences
- Corroboration of victim testimony
- Presumption under POCSO Act
- Standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt
- Age determination of victim
