Sikkim High Court: A Division Bench of Bhaskar Raj Pradhan and Arup Kumar Goswami, JJ. while upholding the Judgment of acquittal passed by Special Judge (POCSO), held that,
A delicate balance is required to be maintained between the judicial perception of the anguish of the victim and the presumption of innocence of the accused and an inequitable tilt either way may not render sound justice.
Sole testimony of minor prosecutrix was that she was sexually assaulted by respondent that was disbelieved by Special Judge (POCSO).
Assistant Public Prosecutor submitted that the sole testimony as stated above had not been demolished during the cross-examination and as such the Special Judge erred in discarding it.
Complainant (PW-1) with whom the minor prosecutrix was staying for the last 4 months had filed the FIR against the respondent. In the FIR it was stated that when complainant enquired from the minor prosecutrix, she was informed that respondent had been assaulting and raping her for a very long time.
Gynaecologist opined that clinical and cytopathological report was not suggestive of recent forceful sexual intercourse. She admitted that hymen can tear and rupture from so many other things besides sexual intercourse.
Minor Prosecutrix further stated that although PW-1 and her husband slept together in the same house but nobody noticed the respondent sexually assaulting her and whenever she tried to raise an alarm he used to put his hand on her mouth.
Daughter of the respondent told minor witness (PW-3) that the minor prosecutrix was a girl of immoral character. The minor prosecutrix deposed that she was deeply hurt and mentally affected after hearing this and started crying when the complainant (PW-1) saw her. At this moment, the minor prosecutrix told the complainant (PW-1) about the sexual assault.
Decision of the Court
Bench — keeping in mind the ambit and scope of the judicial examination in the present appeal against acquittal, stated that judgment of acquittal passed by the Special Judge is neither perverse nor against the weight of the evidence on record.
Special Judge had disbelieved the deposition of penetrative sexual assault made by the minor prosecutrix. Disbelief was fortified by the medical as well as forensic evidence.
Reasoning for the above decision
Defence had brought out the animosity between the complainant (PW-1) and the sole prosecutrix on the one side and the respondent and his daughter on the other. The negative result of both the medical and forensic evidence collected immediately after the alleged assault does not help the prosecution case further, more so, when she alleged forceful penetrative sexual assault.
Defence has also been able to bring out certain facts about the altercations and fight between them immediately preceding the lodging of the FIR.
All of the above leans towards the claim of innocence of the respondent.
Thus, in the above view, judgment of acquittal is upheld. [State of Sikkim v. Karna Bahadur Rai, Crl. A. No. 07 of 2019, decided on 14-03-2020]