The appellant impugns the judgment on an order that directs his conviction. The offense was under Section 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter POCSO). The appellant has to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 5 years along with fine.
Brief facts of the case
The victim is a 9-year-old who was present in the house with her brother. The appellant came and enquired about the presence of the mother. When he got to know that the mother was away, he walked into the house and started touching and rubbing the thighs of the child victim. The victim got frightened, and tried to run from the house and went to the neighborhood house.
When she found out that no one was home, she returned to her house. After an hour, the appellant came into the house again, but the victim asked the appellant to leave and he left. Half an hour later, when the victim was going to her tuition class, the appellant once again met her and asked her at what time she would return. She did not respond and proceeded to her tuition. In the night, she came home and informed her mother, and thereafter they called the police.
Arguments before the court
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the testimonies of the child victim, her mother and brother remain consistent before the court. They submit that there are no discrepancies in the statement of the witnesses. Also, no material is present to show a loan transaction between the parties. They submit that the appellant, a mere worker could not extend any loan of any form. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that there was a discrepancy in the statement of the victim. They further contend that the entire complaint seems to be an outcome of a loan transaction between the appellant and the mother of the victim.
The Delhi High Court is of the view that based on the testimony of the child victim and her family, there is no reason to disbelieve it. The testimony was also of sterling quality and there was no point of any discrepancy. The appellant did not show any reason to prove the testimony as unreliable too. Pulling down the leggings and touching the thighs is evident of sexual intent. It constitutes an offence of sexual assault under the POCSO Act. Since the sexual assault was committed on a child below 12 years, it amounts to aggravated sexual assault. It is punishable under Section 10 of the POCSO Act. The appeal is thus dismissed and the conviction is upheld.
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.