Case Note & Summary
The case involves an appeal against conviction under POCSO Act and IPC for alleged aggravated penetrative sexual assault of a 6-year-old girl. The victim claimed that the appellant, a neighbour, inserted his finger into her private parts. However, the medical evidence showed no injuries or signs of assault. The victim's testimony was inconsistent with her mother's and other witnesses' statements regarding the date and details of the incident. The High Court found that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt due to these contradictions and lack of corroboration. The court set aside the conviction and acquitted the appellant, emphasizing that in the absence of reliable evidence, the benefit of doubt must be given to the accused.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Appreciation of Evidence - POCSO Act - Inconsistency in Victim's Testimony - The victim's testimony regarding the incident was inconsistent with medical evidence and other prosecution witnesses, leading to doubt about the occurrence. Held that conviction cannot be based on such unreliable evidence (Paras 10-15). B) Criminal Law - Medical Evidence - Contradiction - The medical report showed no injuries or signs of sexual assault, contradicting the victim's claim of finger insertion causing pain. Held that medical evidence is crucial in such cases and its inconsistency weakens the prosecution case (Paras 12-14). C) Criminal Law - Benefit of Doubt - Acquittal - Due to material contradictions and lack of corroboration, the appellant is entitled to benefit of doubt. Held that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt (Paras 16-18).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 342 and 376-AB IPC and Section 5(m) read with 6 of POCSO Act is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The judgment of conviction and sentence dated 22.09.2023 in Spl.SC.No.35/2022 is set aside. The appellant is acquitted of all charges. Bail bonds, if any, stand cancelled.
Law Points
- Appreciation of evidence in POCSO cases
- Corroboration of victim testimony
- Medical evidence inconsistency
- Benefit of doubt
