Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Balaji Sarjerao Kamble, was convicted by the Special Judge, Pune, for the rape of a 7-year-old girl under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The incident allegedly occurred on 21 December 2013 at about 8:00 p.m. The victim, a first-standard student, lived with her mother Shamalata Gadkari (PW2), father, and brother. The appellant was a neighbour who frequently visited their home and was called 'mama' by the children. The prosecution's case rested primarily on the testimony of the child victim (PW1) and her mother. The child claimed that the appellant took her to his room, removed her clothes, and inserted his finger into her private parts. The mother testified that the child complained of pain and disclosed the incident. However, the High Court found significant inconsistencies in the child's testimony, including contradictions regarding the date, time, and details of the act. The medical evidence did not support the allegations, as the doctor found no injuries or signs of sexual assault. The court also noted that the mother's testimony was contradictory and that the child's statement under Section 164 CrPC differed from her court testimony. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, as the child's testimony lacked corroboration and was unreliable. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Section 376 IPC, Sections 4, 8 POCSO Act - Conviction based on child witness testimony - The appellant was convicted for rape of a 7-year-old girl. The High Court found the victim's testimony inconsistent and lacking corroboration from 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 1-33) B) Evidence Law - Child Witness - Credibility - The court examined the testimony of the child victim (PW1) and found material contradictions and improvements. The mother (PW2) also gave inconsistent evidence. The court held that the child's testimony was not reliable without corroboration, and the accused was entitled to acquittal. (Paras 10-25) C) Criminal Procedure - Appeal - Acquittal - The High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellant of all charges. (Para 33)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The judgment and order dated 15 December 2015 passed by the Special Judge, Pune, in Special (Child) Case No.66 of 2014 is set aside. The appellant is acquitted of all charges. His bail bonds stand cancelled.
Law Points
- Conviction under Section 376 IPC and Sections 4
- 8 of POCSO Act requires corroboration of child witness testimony
- Inconsistencies in victim's statement and lack of medical evidence lead to acquittal
- Benefit of doubt given to accused when prosecution fails to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt
