"Time To Discredit A Routine Line Of Defence Taken By Accused Facing Charge Of Rape Or Sexual Assault"- Meghalaya HC In POCSO Case

A Meghalaya High Court Bench of Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice W Diengdoh has observed that "when the survivor is a child of, say, up to 11-12 years of age, unless the court finds the child to be precocious enough to make out a story and consistently repeat the same, the fact that there may not have been any witness to the incident of sexual assault may not, by itself, let the accused off the hook".

Further, the Court said, "It is time to completely discredit a routine line of defence often taken by an accused facing a charge of rape or sexual assault. The general refrain is that since the decision hinges on the uncorroborated allegation of the survivor and the complete denial thereof by the accused, in the absence of any ocular witness, the allegation of the survivor should not be accepted as gospel truth".

Counsel PT Sangma appeared for the appellant. GA R Gurung and GA S Shyam appeared for the respondents.

In this case, the Court heard an appeal by a convict under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. The petitioner contended that the trial court erred in completely relying on the survivor's statement to convict the appellant.

According to the FIR, when the boy’s mother asked him to go for tuition, he denied stating that he was not interested. Later, it was discovered that the appellant would keep the survivor back at the end of every session and sexually abuse him. The boy also complained of pain in his rectum. The survivor had stated that the appellant did “dirty acts” with him and that the appellant also threatened him not to reveal such incidents to anyone.

A medical examination was conducted, and the statements alleged were found true. Further, no anomaly of any kind was pointed out on behalf of the appellant in evidence.

In light of the same, the Court observed that "In the light of the clear and believable statement of the survivor, the corroboration of sexual assault by the medical examination conducted on him and nothing brought by the appellant to establish to the contrary, this was a rather an open and shut case for the trial court".

Holding that there was no merit in the appeal, the Court held that "In such circumstances, based on the material before the trial court, it was perfectly justified for the appellant to be convicted for aggravated penetrative sexual assault, inter alia, under clauses (l) and (m) of Section 5 of the Act of 2012. As a consequence, the appellant has been appropriately punished under Section 6 of such Act and sentenced to 15 years in prison, together with a fine of Rs.1 lakh."

Cause Title: Arjun Das v. State of Meghalaya & Ors.

Click here to read/download the Judgment