The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction of an individual under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act) for raping a girl who was less than 3.5 years old.
Justice Bharati Dangre, dismissed the accused’s appeal against his conviction for penetrative sexual assault under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and for rape under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The court acknowledged that it was not reasonable to expect such a young child to provide an exact description of their private parts.
The Bombay High Court observed that a 3 ½ year old girl, who has not yet learned about her own body, cannot be expected to give an accurate account of her private parts. However, during her statement given under section 164, she specifically accused her friend’s father of inappropriate touching in the toilet and called him a “bad uncle.” In court, she also mentioned that the accused had inserted his finger into her private part, which resulted in significant bleeding. Due to her innocence, she was unable to provide a detailed description of the incident.
The Court stated that due to the girl’s innocent nature, she did not comprehend the gravity of the situation. This is why the doctor who examined her after the incident reported that she was normal, she being unaware of the severity of the act committed against her.
The High Court observed that it would be unreasonable to expect a four-year-old girl to focus on a photograph and accurately identify a person, as young children may be easily distracted by external stimuli or experience anxiety. In the present case, the victim’s stressful situation may have contributed to her inability to focus. Justice Dangre arrived at this conclusion after reviewing the special judge’s record, which indicated that the victim had whispered about the incident while fidgeting with objects on the table.
The High Court noted that it would be unfair to expect a young girl of that age to behave more responsibly, and that the task of extracting her testimony must have been difficult for the Special Judge. However, the girl was able to describe the incident committed by the accused clearly and denied making any false statements.
According to the prosecution, in November 2017, a young girl was sexually assaulted by her friend’s father, who lived in the same neighborhood. The incident took place in the afternoon while the victim was playing with her siblings and her mother was nearby. The accused took her to his house and inserted his finger into her private part, causing her to bleed. The girl ran to her mother, removed her underwear, and went to the bathroom where she was unable to urinate and was in pain. Her mother noticed the blood and asked her what happened, and the victim revealed that the accused had sexually assaulted her.
Based on the information provided, it seems that the accused was charged, tried, and convicted for a crime that involved a child victim. The High Court reviewed the trial court’s decision and affirmed the conviction, citing the victim’s testimony and medical evidence as proof of the accused’s guilt. The High Court also noted that the victim was young and naive, and thus not likely to have fabricated the allegations or understood the full extent of the offense.
According to Justice Dangre, the courts aimed to provide appropriate punishment to the accused for causing harm to the victim and possibly inflicting long-lasting trauma. Even though the little girl could not be shielded from the sexual offense, justice was served by convicting the accused for his wrongdoing, which caused an unexpressed but potentially enduring impact on the victim. The court also imposed a suitable sentence on the accused.
Source: https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/delhi-high-court-dismissal-judicial-officer-accepting-hotel-bookings-international-trip-unknown-person