POCSO | Investigating Officer Has To Inquire About Victim's Age; Medical Opinion & Self-Assessment Not Sufficient: Patna HC

The Patna High Court observed that it is the duty of the Investigating Officer to inquire about the age of the victim in POCSO cases.

The Court added that medical opinion and self-assessment are no sure grounds of computing a person's age.

The Court acquitted a young man convicted of kidnapping and sexually assaulting a minor under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).

Stressing the importance of age verification, the Court noted that the Investigating Officers are obligated to actively seek the victim's age, particularly to confirm whether they are a minor.

The Bench comprising Justice Ashutosh Kumar and Justice Nani Tagia observed, “It was imperative on the part of the Investigating Officer, we repeat, to have inquired about the age of the victim, especially, for ascertaining whether she had crossed the threshold of minority. The medical opinion and self-assessment are no sure grounds of computing the age of a person”.

Advocate Manendra Kumar Sinha appeared for the Appellant and Additional Public Prosecutor Abhimanyu Sharma appeared for the Respondent/State.

A 20-year-old man was convicted of abduction and sexual assault of a minor girl. He was sentenced to 7 years imprisonment for abduction and 20 years each for offences under Sections 366A and 376(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. The Appellant, aged 20 to 21 at the time of judgment, allegedly enticed the victim to Kanpur, where she stayed as his wedded wife for about two months. The medical examination indicated her age to be 15 to 16 years. While the initial FIR suggested kidnapping, the victim's later testimony contradicted coercion, revealing a consensual relationship. Aggrieved, the Accused approached the Court.

The Court noted that the Trial Court did not provide a clear opinion on the age of the victim. The father of the victim mentioned a range of 15 to 16 years, while the mother consistently stated the victim's age as 14 years. The victim herself stated her age as 14 during the legal proceedings, and the medical examination suggested an age range of 15 to 16 years.

Despite this ambiguity, the Bench noted that it was established that the victim is less than 16 years old, considering the average of these age projections. The Court emphasized that it was the duty of the Investigating Officer to confirm the victim's age, particularly by inquiring with the school she attended.

Furthermore, the Court observed that the medical examination indicated no signs of force or injury on the victim's body, but the unexplained 13-week pregnancy raised questions. Despite the victim's denial of any sexual intercourse with the Appellant, she eventually admitted to becoming pregnant due to a sexual relationship with him, suggesting inconsistency in her statements.

Additionally, the Bench observed that while the victim initially claimed to be kidnapped, no evidence supported this claim. The fact that the victim was found at the Appellant's house after two months contradicts the kidnapping narrative. The absence of outcry during the journey and stay with the Appellant suggests a voluntary arrangement. The Court also noted the question of the victim's age but found no decisive evidence to prove she was a minor. Considering these factors, the Court held that insufficient evidence was produced to convict the Appellant under POCSO sections.

Accordingly, the Court allowed the Appeal and acquitted the Accused.

Cause Title: Avinash Kumar Ranjan v The State of Bihar

Click here to read/download Judgment