SHRIKANT Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has called in question the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the II Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Vijayapur in Spl.POCSO Case No.12/2015. The learned Special Judge has convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and sentenced the accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- with default sentence.

(2.) The brief factual matrix of the case are that: PW.1 Smt. Jeenath W/o Mehaboob Makandar has lodged a complaint against the accused stating that, they are residents of Bidigalli, Agasar Street in Vijayapur, the accused is also a resident of the same place. The complainant has a daughter examined as PW.8, it is alleged that about 4 days prior to the lodgement of the complaint i.e. on 28.03.2015, accused who is the neighbour of PW.1 called the said victim girl aged about four years on the guise of giving her chocolate and after taking her inside his house, he removed her pant and inserted his finger into her vagina and having sustained pain, the said girl started screaming for help, immediately PW.1 went there and saw the accused was fingering the vagina of the said girl, and brought the child back to the house. She has also informed her husband about this, but they did not inform to any body. On the next day, PW.1 was bathing her child at that time and after attending her nature's calls, the child complained pain in her vagina. Thereafter, they discussed with the neighbours and elders in the said area and they advised them to lodge a complaint, otherwise accused may also do the same to the other children in the area. Thereafter, it appears on 01.04.2015, PW.1 lodged a complaint as per Ex.P1, and the same was registered by the respondent Police in Crime No.80/2015 under section 3(b) read with 4 of POCSO Act, 2012. After investigation, the police have laid a chargesheet against the appellant.

(3.) Before the trial Court, the prosecution has examined as many as 11 witnesses and got marked 14 documents at Ex.P1 to P14. The accused did not lead any evidence on his side, though opportunity was provided after he was examined under section 313 of Cr.P.C. by the Court. The trial Court after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence on record has convicted the accused for the above said offence and sentenced him accordingly.