Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Samadhan Kashiram Khirodkar, was convicted by the Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Khamgaon, in Sessions Trial No.92/2015 for offences under Section 376(2)(i) and (n) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act). He was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and a fine of Rs.1,000/-, with default imprisonment of one month. The victim was a minor girl aged about 7 years. The incident occurred on 24.08.2015, and the FIR was lodged on 27.08.2015 by the victim's mother, Uma Wadode (PW2). The appellant challenged the conviction on grounds of false implication, tutoring of the victim by her mother, political enmity with one Avinash Umbarkar, and delay in lodging the FIR. The High Court heard arguments from Mr. R. R. Vyas for the appellant and Mrs. S. V. Kolhe for the State. The court examined the evidence, including the victim's testimony and medical evidence, and found the victim's testimony credible and trustworthy. The medical evidence corroborated the sexual assault. The court held that the delay in FIR was satisfactorily explained by the mother's shock and consultation with family members. The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the conviction and sentence.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape of Minor - Conviction under Section 376(2)(i) and (n) IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act - Victim's Testimony - The appellant was convicted for committing rape on a minor girl aged about 7 years. The High Court upheld the conviction, holding that the testimony of the victim was credible and trustworthy, and the medical evidence corroborated the sexual assault. The court found no reason to disbelieve the victim or her mother. (Paras 1-3) B) Criminal Procedure - Delay in FIR - Explanation - The FIR was lodged on 27.08.2015, while the incident occurred on 24.08.2015. The delay of three days was explained by the victim's mother as she was under shock and consulted family members. The court held that the delay was not fatal to the prosecution case. (Para 3) C) Evidence Act - Medical Evidence - Corroboration - The medical evidence showed injuries consistent with sexual assault, which corroborated the victim's testimony. The court relied on the medical report to affirm the conviction. (Para 3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 376(2)(i) and (n) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. Conviction and sentence upheld.
Law Points
- Conviction under Section 376(2)(i) and (n) IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act can be based on sole testimony of victim if found credible
- Delay in FIR is not fatal if satisfactorily explained
- Medical evidence corroborating sexual assault strengthens prosecution case
