Gauhati High Court Reverses POCSO Conviction Due to Inconsistent Victim Testimony and Lack of Medical Evidence for Sexual Assault
The central issue in this case revolved around the credibility of the victim's statements and the absence of concrete evidence of sexual assault during the medical examination conducted by a medical officer.
Gauhati High Court Reverses POCSO Conviction Due to Inconsistent Victim Testimony and Lack of Medical Evidence for Sexual Assault
The central issue in this case revolved around the credibility of the victim's statements and the absence of concrete evidence of sexual assault during the medical examination conducted by a medical officer.
The victim in this case was a 16-year-old girl, and her mother alleged that the accused, who had stayed with them for a night, had induced the victim to elope with him. This allegation led to charges under the POCSO Act, which is designed to protect children from sexual offences.
The legal counsel representing the accused in this case put forth an argument asserting that the victim was of legal age (a major) at the time of the incident. Additionally, they contended that the victim had willingly eloped with the accused, implying that her actions were voluntary and not the result of any coercion or criminal activity on the part of the accused.
This argument appears to be a crucial aspect of the defence's case. If the victim was indeed of legal age at the time and had voluntarily left with the accused, it could challenge the applicability of certain provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, which is primarily intended to safeguard minors (individuals under the age of 18) from sexual offences. In such cases, the consent and age of the victim can have significant legal implications.
The court made a significant observation in this case regarding the victim's claim of sexual assault. According to the court's findings, the evidence provided by the Medical Officer (MO) did not support the victim's claim. Specifically, the court noted that there were no visible marks of violence or injury detected on the victim's private parts during the medical examination.
The court's statement, "When the evidence of the prosecutrix is not substantiated by the evidence of the MO and I/O, then doubt slowly infiltrates," underscores the principle that in criminal proceedings, the prosecution must establish its case beyond a reasonable doubt. If the evidence provided by the victim is not supported or corroborated by other evidence, such as medical or investigative findings, it can lead to doubts regarding the accusations.
It was also noted that the victim alleged that the accused forced her to board a bus to Guwahati. The court said that "If the victim was unwilling to proceed with the accused to Morigaon or to Guwahati, she would have easily raised the alarm because she was travelling in a bus and the people would have rescued her from the clutches of the accused. The evidence of the victim appears to be too far-fetched and sketchy.”
According to the court's remarks, the prosecutrix's statements had shown a pattern of improvement, change, and contradiction at different stages of the legal proceedings. The court emphasised that the testimony of the prosecutrix exhibited significant material inconsistencies.
The court's assertion that a conviction cannot be based on such testimony that lacks credibility is consistent with established legal principles. In criminal cases, including those involving sexual offences, the burden of proof rests on the prosecution, and the evidence presented must be reliable, consistent, and convincing beyond a reasonable doubt for a conviction to be justified.
As a result of its deliberations and considerations, the Court decided to set aside the impugned judgment and the sentencing order that had been issued by the Trial Court.
Important Links