MUKISH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CRL.M.A. 9812/2022 (Exemption) Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions.

(2.) Application is disposed of.

(3.) In the present appeal the main challenge to the impugned judgment of the learned Trial Court is on the ground that the prosecution has not been successful in establishing the guilt of the appellant in respect of offence punishable under Sec. 6 of the POCSO Act. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the testimony of the prosecution witnesses did not inspire any confidence and no conviction or sentence can possibly be awarded on the basis of such evidence. She further argued that the witnesses, PW1 i.e. the mother of the victim, and PW3 i.e. father of the victim, had not supported the case of the prosecution and have deposed in favour of the appellant. Learned counsel for the appellant referred to the cross-examination dtd. 3/5/2016 of PW1 and cross-examination of PW3 to contend that the said witnesses who were the parents of the victim had turned hostile and had rather deposed in favour of the appellant. Further, even the victim was not examined, which was fatal to the prosecution case.