Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – Section 6 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 376-AB – Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 118 – POCSO – Child witness testimony – Admissibility and reliability of child witness evidence – Corroboration of evidence – Aggravated penetrative sexual assault – Medical evidence – Conviction based on sole testimony of victim – The appellant challenged the conviction primarily on the grounds of alleged perversity in the trial court’s findings.
The appellate court considered the principles governing the admissibility and reliability of evidence provided by a child witness, as delineated in Marbet Nongsiej vs. State of Meghalaya, 2020 Cri.L.J.1223. These principles include assessing the child’s competence to testify, ensuring absence of tutoring, and discerning the child’s understanding of truth and falsehood.
In the present case, the victim, a child below 12 years of age, provided detailed testimony corroborated by multiple witnesses. The court highlighted the victim’s credible deposition, her ability to withstand cross-examination, and the corroboration provided by eyewitnesses and medical evidence. Despite the absence of semen in forensic samples, the court emphasized that the injuries observed on the victim’s private parts were sufficient to establish aggravated penetrative sexual assault.
The court further noted that the victim’s age, supported by documentary evidence, reinforced the gravity of the offense. After thorough examination of the evidence and circumstances, the court upheld the trial court’s decision, finding no merit in the appeal. (Para 39)
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
2024 STPL(Web) 24 HP
[2024 HHC 236]
Dharam Chand Vs. State Of Himachal Pradesh
Cr. A. No. 592 of 2019-Decided on 08-01-2024
https://stpllaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/2024-STPLWeb-24-HP.pdf
