‘Consistent testimony of a child victim alone is sufficient, even without corroborating medical evidence’
Staff Reporter
Guwahati: The Gauhati High Court upheld the conviction of a man under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act for sexually assaulting a 12-year-old girl, ruling that the consistent testimony of a child victim alone is sufficient for conviction even without corroborating medical evidence.
The ruling was made in an appeal (Crl.A./21/2024) by a man convicted of sexually assaulting a minor girl, holding that the consistent and credible testimony of a child victim is sufficient to sustain a conviction under the POCSO Act, even without corroborating medical evidence or independent eyewitness support.
Justice Mitali Thakuria, while pronouncing the judgement, found no reason to interfere with the conviction handed down by the Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge (POCSO), Morigaon, which had in December 2023 sentenced the appellant Md Mansur Ali to seven years of rigorous imprisonment under Section 10 of the POCSO Act and one year under Section 341 of the IPC for wrongful restraint.
The case dates to January 15, 2017, when the mother of the 12-year-old girl victim, referred to as “Miss X”, lodged an FIR at Morigaon Police Station. She alleged that the accused stopped her daughter while she was returning home from a local madrassa and attempted to sexually assault her. Spotting a person approaching on the road, the victim made a hue and cry, and somehow she pushed away the accused appellant and managed to return home. She immediately reported the incident to her mother. The accused, declared an absconder during investigation, was arrested later on October 3, 2017.
The appellant’s counsel argued that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. He pointed to the absence of any injury on the victim’s body during the medical examination conducted within 12 hours of the incident. He also flagged an inconsistency: the victim’s statement before the magistrate under Section 164 CrPC mentioned 6.00 AM as the time of the incident, while the FIR and her court testimony stated 8.00 AM.
These arguments were countered by the additional public prosecutor and legal aid counsel for the informant-respondent. The prosecution submitted that minor contradictions in peripheral details cannot be used to discredit an otherwise reliable account. It was argued that bodily injuries are not a prerequisite for proving sexual assault and that Madrassas remain open on Sundays, addressing the defence’s contention about the improbability of the girls attending Madrassa that day.
The court carefully examined the evidence and found the victim’s overall testimony consistent, trustworthy, and worthy of full weight. “The victim can be termed a sterling witness, wherein she gave her evidence without any contradiction and was found to be consistent in her statement at every stage,” the court recorded. On the timing discrepancy, it held that a single reference to 6:00 AM in the Section 164 statement, which the victim herself clarified during trial, could not be the sole ground to discard her entire evidence. On the medical evidence, the court rejected the argument that the absence of injury marks was fatal to the prosecution’s case. Since the allegation was not of penetrative sexual assault, there was no reason to expect such injuries. The court also noted that the accused’s own defence that he was merely trying to save the victim from falling off her bicycle near a pond inadvertently confirmed his presence at the scene, thereby lending credence to the prosecution’s account.
The defence’s claim of prior enmity was found to be unsubstantiated, with no supporting evidence placed on record beyond bare suggestions made during cross-examination. The court found the birth certificate, issued just two months after the victim’s birth in 2005, to be contemporaneous and reliable. It further held that the defence failed to rebut the presumption of guilt under Sections 29 and 30 of the POCSO Act once the prosecution had established the foundational facts. Dismissing the appeal as being devoid of any merit, the court upheld the conviction and directed the trial court record be sent back with a copy of the judgement.
Also Read: Sootea TLNC Meet Adopts Resolutions on Traffic, HIV/AIDS and POCSO Awareness