#Sexual Assault Archives

15 Mar

The Kerala High Court upholds the Conviction of Father under the POCSO Act for Sexually Assaulting his 9 year old Daughter

Blog # Pocso Act, #Daughter, #Father, #kerala hc, #life imprisonment, #Sexual Assault, #Special Court, #sterling witness

Case title – Stephen VS State of Kerala

Case no. – CRL.A No. 138 OF 2017

Decision on – March 05, 2024

Quoram – Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar & Justice Johnson John

Facts of the case

The appellant in the instant case is none other than the father of the victim. The accusation against the accused was that he penetrated his penis into the mouth of the victim who was aged 9 years then and threatened her of death, if she discloses the same to anyone.

The Special Court took cognizance of the matter and observed that when the accused was questioned on the incriminating evidence he denied the same and maintained that he has been falsely implicated in the case, with a view to avoid him at the instance of his wife, who maintains an illicit relationship with another. The Court did not find a case fit for acquittal and when called upon for evidence, the accused failed to adduce the same. Hence, the Court convicted and sentenced him to imprisonment and to pay fine for the offences punishable under Section 5(n) read with Section 6 and Section 9(n) read with Section 10 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 506 Part 2 of the IPC.

Submissions on behalf of the Appellant

The Learned Counsel for the accused submitted that the there is no evidence in the case to prove the alleged act of penetrative sexual assault except the evidence tendered by PW2 and further contended that the same was not trustworthy.

He contended that even if the arguendo is accepted the sentence imposed on the accused is grossly disproportionate to the gravity of the offence alleged and pleaded the Court to rectify the same.

Issue

Whether the conviction of the accused and the sentence imposed on him are sustainable in law?

Court’s Analysis and Judgement

The Court examining the statements given by PW1(mother of the victim) and PW2(victim) observed that both of them stood by their statements and there were no instances to doubt the veracity of evidence tendered by them.

The Court noted that the evidence of the victim was the only thing on record to determine the case and it is a settled law that the evidence of the victim of a sexual assault can be the sole basis of a conviction. However, relying on the decision in Rai Sandeep v. State (NCT of Delhi) the Court pointed out that in order to base a conviction solely on the evidence of the rape victim, such evidence shall be of a sterling quality.

The Court observed that the evidence tendered by the victim in the case satisfies the requirement of a sterling witness and therefore, affirmed the decision of the Special Court. The Court also upheld the charges framed against the accused and the punishment imposed on him by the Special Court.

The Kerala High Court, thereby, rejected the appeal of an accused and convicted him under POCSO Act for committing aggravated penetrative sexual assault on his nine-year-old daughter.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Judgement Reviewed by – Keerthi K

Click here to view the Judgement

27 Oct

Suspicion, However Strong It May Be, Cannot Take The Place Of Proof: High Court Of Madhya Pradesh

Prime Legal

Uncategorized #Police, #Posh, #Sexual Assault, #Suspicion

Title: Mukesh Khampariya S/O V The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Ors.

Citation: Writ Petition No. 21852 of 2018

Decided on: 05th Of October, 2023

Coram: Justice Sujoy Paul

Introduction:

This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution assails the order dated 25.06.2018 and the enquiry report dated 25.07.2018 whereby the petitioner was held guilty for committing sexual harassment at the workplace.

Facts:

The petitioner was working as Station House Officer (SHO), in Police Station Gadarwara, District Narsinghpur between 27.08.2016 to 24.03.2017. During that period, respondent was posted in the said police station as Sub- Inspector.Respondent as an afterthought preferred a frivolous complaint dated 16.03.2017 alleging that petitioner committed sexual harassment in the workplace. Pursuant to the complaint dated 16.03.2017, an internal complaint committee was constituted as per the Sexual Harassment of Woman at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal), 2013.

The internal committee consisting of five members conducted the inquiry, recorded statement of witnesses and prepared the report on 26.05.2017 and opined that the allegations against the petitioner for committing sexual harassment in workplace are not established. The respondent preferred an application against the aforesaid report of internal complain committee dated 24.05.2017. On 25.12.2017 the departmental authority came to hold that allegation of sexual harassment could not be established against the petitioner.

learned counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of this Court to another report dated 25.07.2018 whereby another inquiry report was prepared wherein charges were found to be proved against the petitioner.

Court’s decision and analysis :

The complaint can be made in writing within a period of three months from the date of incident. In this case, it is clear that incident had taken place on 12/10/2016 and complaint was preferred on 16/03/2017. Thus, complaint itself was barred by time. Apart from that complaint was considered by a five members committee which came to hold in the report dated 26/05/2017 that allegation of sexual harassment in work place could not be established against the petitioner. Even in Departmental appeal the concern authority came to hold that for want of sufficient evidence, allegation of sexual harassment in workplace could not be established.

here is no material evidence available against the petitioner. Merely because the complainant preferred repeated complains, the petitioner was held to be guilty. Suspicion, however strong it may be, cannot take the place of proof [See: AIR 1964 SC 364 (Union of India v. H.C. Goel)] For this reason also, this enquiry report is liable to be set aside. Hence, impugned order of Police Headquarter dated 25/06/2018 and enquiry report dated 25/07/2018 are set aside.

Written by- Sushant Kumar Sharma

Click here to view judgement

16 Aug

[POCSO Act] The absence of injuries to a victim’s private parts does not rule out penetrative sexual assault, according to the Delhi High Court.

Prime Legal

Blog # Pocso Act, #CPC, #delhi, #delhicourt, #delhihighcourt, #Sexual Assault

Title: Ranjeet Kumar Yadav v. State of NCT of Delhi

Decided on: 14th August, 2023

+ CRL.A. 50/2022

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL

Introduction

The Delhi High Court recently delivered a significant judgment regarding the interpretation of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The case involved the conviction of an appellant for sexual offenses against a young victim. The central issue revolved around the absence of injuries on the victim’s private parts and its implications on the nature of the assault.

Facts

The appellant was convicted under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, along with sections 363 and 342 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), for sexual offenses against a four-and-a-half-year-old victim. The defense argued that there were contradictions in the victim’s statements and that the prosecution’s case rested solely on the victim’s testimony, lacking sufficient corroboration. They contended that the absence of certain injuries suggested a lesser offense of “touching” rather than penetration under the POCSO Act.

Analysis and Held

Justice Amit Bansal, upholding the conviction, clarified that the absence of injuries on the victim’s private parts cannot automatically negate the possibility of a penetrative sexual assault under the POCSO Act. He emphasized that injuries are not necessary in every case of sexual assault. The Court referred to previous judgments and established that the mere lack of injuries should not undermine the credibility of the victim’s testimony.

The Court addressed the alleged inconsistencies in the victim’s statements, noting that minor contradictions, particularly considering the young age of the victim, do not render her testimony unreliable. The Court highlighted the statutory presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act, which places the onus on the accused to rebut the presumption by leading evidence or discrediting the prosecution’s case.

In conclusion, the Delhi High Court held that the absence of injuries does not automatically disprove the occurrence of a penetrative sexual assault under the POCSO Act. The Court underscored the importance of evaluating the victim’s testimony in its entirety and considering the overall context of the case. The conviction of the appellant was upheld, and the appeal was dismissed.

Written by- Ankit Kaushik

Click here to view Judgement

8 Jun

Karnataka High Court Denies Plea to Quash FIR Against Gynecologist under Section 21 of POCSO Act for Failure to Report Sexual Assault on a Minor

Prime Legal

Blog #Gynecologist, #minor, #pocsoact, #Sexual Assault

Karnataka High Court

Chandrashekar T.B. v. State of Karnataka & Devika

Bench- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA

WRIT PETITION No.8789 OF 2023 (GM – RES)

Decided On 02-06-2023

Facts of the case-

The petitioner, a retired doctor now running Prashanthi Hospital in Laxmisha Nagara, Chikkamagaluru, is the subject of a crime registration. On 17-12-2022, between 13:00 to 14:00 hours, the victim, Devica arrived at the petitioner’s hospital seeking treatment.

The victim was in critical condition with severe bleeding and decreased vitals, allegedly caused by taking abortion tablets 2 to 3 days prior. Accompanying the victim were individuals claiming to be her parents.

The petitioner promptly admitted the patient to the hospital and provided immediate medical intervention, including oxygen and IV fluids, which improved the victim’s condition. However, it is claimed that the petitioner performed an incomplete medical termination of pregnancy, leaving the placenta behind.

Due to the victim’s instability and ongoing bleeding, the petitioner performed a procedure to retain the placenta, as further expulsion would have endangered the victim’s life. After approximately two days of admission, once the victim’s condition stabilized, she was discharged in the morning and taken by her purported relatives.

Around one month later, Crime No.1 of 2023 was registered at Belthangadi Police Station for the aforementioned offenses. Initially, the petitioner was not named as an accused party. Following an investigation, a notice was issued to the petitioner on 17-02-2023, accusing them of performing a medical termination of pregnancy on a 12-year and 11-month-old victim who had been subjected to sexual activity.

The petitioner was charged under Section 21 of the relevant Act. Subsequently, on 26-02-2023, a charge sheet was filed against other accused parties as well as the petitioner/accused No.8 for the offense under Section 21 of the Act. The filing of this charge sheet has prompted the petitioner to approach the court through the present petition.

Relevant Provisions

POCSO ACT, 2012	Related to
Sec. 21	Punishment for failure to report or record a case

Judgement

The court has dismissed the plea of the accused, a gynecologist, and expressed strong dissatisfaction with the accused’s failure to recognize the victim’s age during the medical termination of pregnancy, despite having 35 years of experience in the field. The bench emphasized that such a lapse in judgment by a seasoned professional is unacceptable.

Furthermore, the court highlighted the significant concern that non-reporting of cases involving minors and their exploitation would allow offenders to evade legal consequences. This directly undermines the core objective of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses (POCSO) Act, which aims to safeguard the rights and well-being of minors. The court emphasized the need for strict adherence to reporting protocols to ensure that offenders are held accountable and justice is served.

The dismissal of the accused’s plea and the court’s strong remarks reflect the gravity of the situation and the court’s commitment to upholding the principles of justice, protection, and deterrence in cases involving the exploitation of minors.

JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY ABHAY SHUKLA

Click here to view judgment