Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Ketan Sanjay Kokate, was convicted by the Special Judge, POCSO, Pune for offences under Section 376 IPC and Section 3 punishable under Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO). He was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 7 years with a fine of Rs.10,000/-. The victim's father (PW1) lodged a missing report on 25.5.2014, and later an FIR suspecting the accused had enticed his daughter under promise of marriage. The victim (PW2) was traced with the accused at Warje. The prosecution examined 10 witnesses. The accused denied the charges. The High Court found that the victim's testimony was inconsistent and contained major contradictions. She initially stated she went willingly with the accused and married him, but later claimed she was forced. Medical evidence showed her hymen was intact and no injuries, contradicting her claim of repeated penetrative sexual assault. The court held that while the victim's consent is irrelevant due to her minority, the prosecution failed to prove the act of penetrative sexual assault beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the accused was acquitted.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Section 376 IPC - Consent of Minor - The victim being a minor, her consent is immaterial; however, the prosecution must still prove the act of penetrative sexual assault beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 1-21) B) Evidence Law - Testimony of Victim - Corroboration - Inconsistencies - The testimony of the victim must be reliable and consistent; major contradictions and improvements in her evidence create doubt, and in the absence of corroboration, the accused is entitled to benefit of doubt. (Paras 10-18) C) POCSO Act - Section 3/4 - Penetrative Sexual Assault - Medical Evidence - Medical evidence did not support the victim's claim of repeated sexual assault; the hymen was intact and no injuries were found, which contradicts the allegation of penetrative sexual assault. (Paras 15-16)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 376 IPC and Section 4 of POCSO Act is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. The impugned judgment and order dated 30.03.2020 in Special POCSO Case No.107 of 2016 is set aside. The appellant is acquitted of all charges. His bail bonds stand cancelled.
Law Points
- Consent of minor is no consent
- Inconsistencies in victim's testimony
- Lack of corroboration
- Benefit of doubt
- Section 376 IPC
- Section 4 POCSO Act
