Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Libnus s/o Fransis Kujur, was convicted by the Special Judge, Gadchiroli, in Special POCSO Case No. 07/2019 for offences under Sections 354-A(1)(i) and 448 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 8, 10 and 12 read with Section 9(m) and 11(i) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act). The prosecution case was that on 11/02/2018, the appellant entered the house of the informant (mother of the prosecutrix) while she was at work and molested her five-year-old daughter. The mother returned home and caught the appellant red-handed holding the hands of her daughter. She raised an alarm, and neighbours gathered, but the appellant fled. A crime was registered, and after investigation, charge-sheet was filed. The trial court convicted the appellant and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years under Section 10 of POCSO Act, one year simple imprisonment under Section 448 IPC, and fine. The appellant appealed against the conviction and sentence. The High Court examined the evidence, including the testimony of the mother, the victim (through her mother), and neighbours. The court found the evidence credible and corroborated. The court upheld the conviction but reduced the sentence under Section 10 of POCSO Act from 10 years to 5 years, considering the appellant's age (50 years) and lack of criminal antecedents. The court also directed that the fine amount be paid as compensation to the victim. The appeal was partly allowed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Sexual Offences - POCSO Act - Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault - Section 10 read with Section 9(m) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - The appellant was convicted for committing aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a five-year-old girl - The court held that the evidence of the mother and neighbours was credible and corroborated the prosecution case - The conviction was upheld but the sentence was reduced from 10 years to 5 years considering the appellant's age and lack of criminal antecedents (Paras 1-10). B) Criminal Law - Sexual Offences - POCSO Act - Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment - Sections 8 and 12 read with Section 11(i) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - The appellant was also convicted for sexual assault and sexual harassment - The court found that the acts of the appellant constituted sexual assault and harassment under the Act - No separate sentence was imposed as the main sentence under Section 10 was sufficient (Paras 2-3). C) Criminal Law - Indian Penal Code - Criminal Trespass - Section 448 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The appellant was convicted for house-trespass - The court upheld the conviction as the appellant entered the house of the victim without permission - Sentence of one year simple imprisonment was imposed (Para 2). D) Criminal Law - Indian Penal Code - Sexual Harassment - Section 354-A(1)(i) of Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The appellant was convicted for sexual harassment - The court found that the appellant's act of molesting the minor girl amounted to sexual harassment - No separate sentence was imposed (Para 3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 354-A(1)(i) and 448 of IPC and Sections 8, 10 and 12 read with Section 9(m) and 11(i) of POCSO Act is sustainable on the basis of the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal partly allowed. Conviction upheld but sentence under Section 10 of POCSO Act reduced from 10 years rigorous imprisonment to 5 years rigorous imprisonment. Fine amount of Rs. 25,000 to be paid as compensation to the victim. No separate sentence for other offences.
Law Points
- Conviction under POCSO Act
- Sentencing discretion
- Aggravated penetrative sexual assault
- Sexual assault
- Sexual harassment
- Criminal trespass
- Credibility of child witness
- Corroboration of evidence
