Simplified Explanation of the Judgment:
In a recent judgment, the Hon’ble Patna High Court acquitted a man convicted under charges of rape and offences under the POCSO Act. The trial court had sentenced the appellant to ten years of rigorous imprisonment based on the testimony of the prosecutrix and medical evidence. However, the High Court found key deficiencies in the prosecution's case.
The complainant alleged that the incident occurred early morning on 20.05.2018 when she had gone to relieve herself. The accused allegedly overpowered her at gunpoint and committed rape. She also accused him of photographing her naked and threatening to share the images online. The FIR was lodged eight days after the alleged incident.
The main basis of the appeal was the question of the victim's age. The POCSO Act applies only if the victim is below 18. The prosecution relied only on a medical examination estimating her age between 17-19 years and failed to produce any school or birth certificate. The defense, on the other hand, presented the school admission register proving the complainant was born on 29.05.1997, making her over 20 years old at the time of the incident.
Additionally, the Court found contradictions in the victim’s statements and observed that her testimony lacked consistency. The medical report did not find recent signs of rape or even abrasions on her body, which was expected given the alleged circumstances.
The Court ruled that prosecution failed to prove the foundational facts necessary to invoke the POCSO Act and also did not prove the rape charge beyond reasonable doubt under IPC. Consequently, the Court overturned the conviction and ordered immediate release of the accused.
Significance of the Judgment:
This judgment underscores the importance of strong, consistent evidence in criminal cases, especially those involving serious charges like rape. It reinforces that POCSO provisions cannot be invoked without proving the victim’s minority through credible documentary evidence. The verdict protects individuals from wrongful conviction due to procedural lapses and ensures that legal presumptions like those under Section 29 of the POCSO Act are applied judiciously.
Legal Issues Decided:
-
Whether the prosecution proved the victim was a minor under 18 years of age – No.
-
Whether rape was committed as alleged – No, not proved beyond reasonable doubt.
-
Applicability of POCSO Act based on medical and documentary evidence – Rejected due to victim being over 18.
-
Evaluation of prosecutrix’s testimony – Found inconsistent and unreliable.
Judgments Relied Upon or Cited by the Court:
-
Babu v. State of Kerala, (2010) 9 SCC 189
-
Navin Dhaniram Baraiye v. State of Maharashtra, 2018 SCC Online Bom 1281
-
Joy V.S. v. State of Kerala, (2019) SCC Online Ker 783
-
Sahid Hossain Biswas v. State of West Bengal, 2017 SCC Online Cal 5023
-
Monish v. State of U.P., Crl. Misc. Bail App No. 55026 of 2021
-
Mariappan v. Inspector of Police, Crl. M.P. (MD) No. 1396 of 2023
-
Latu Das v. State of Assam, 2019 SCC Online Gau 5947
-
Jarnail Singh v. State of Haryana, (2013) 7 SCC 263
-
P. Yuvaprakash v. State, 2023 SCC Online SC 846
Case Title: Islam Miyan Hajam @ Islam Miyan vs State of Bihar
Case Number: Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.1210 of 2023
Citation(s): 2024(4) PLJR 579
Coram and Judges: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jitendra Kumar
Advocates:
-
For Appellant: Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey
-
For State: Mr. Ramchandra Singh, APP
-
For Informant: Mr. Naumaan Ahmad
Link to the Judgment:
https://patnahighcourt.gov.in/viewjudgment/MjQjMTIxMCMyMDIzIzEjTg==-uDTXk--am1--JLYQY=
0 Comments