Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Prashant Korwate, was convicted by the Special Judge, Chandrapur, for offences under Section 376(1) IPC read with Section 3 punishable under Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment. He appealed to the Bombay High Court. The prosecution alleged that the appellant committed sexual assault on a minor girl. The High Court examined the evidence, including the victim's testimony, school records showing her date of birth as 11.11.2000, and ossification test report. The court found that the victim was above 18 years on the date of the incident, thus not a 'child' under POCSO Act. Additionally, the victim's testimony regarding the assault was inconsistent and not supported by medical evidence. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, acquitted the appellant, and set aside the conviction.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Age of Victim - Section 376(1) IPC, Section 3/4 POCSO Act - Prosecution failed to prove victim's age as below 18 years - School records and ossification test showed victim was above 18 years on date of incident - Held that conviction under POCSO Act cannot be sustained (Paras 5-10). B) Criminal Law - Rape - Inconsistencies in Testimony - Section 376(1) IPC - Victim's testimony regarding sexual assault was inconsistent and not corroborated by medical evidence - No injury on victim or accused - Held that benefit of doubt must be given to appellant (Paras 11-15).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the victim was a 'child' under the POCSO Act and that the appellant committed sexual assault.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction set aside. Appellant acquitted of all charges. Bail bonds cancelled.
Law Points
- Age of victim must be proved beyond reasonable doubt for POCSO Act applicability
- Inconsistencies in victim's testimony regarding sexual assault
- Benefit of doubt to accused
