SUNIL Vs. STATE NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide the present appeal, the appellant seeks setting aside of the judgment of conviction dtd. 13/11/2024 and the order on sentence dtd. 30/11/2024 rendered in the contest of trial held in Sessions Case No.110/2017 arising out of FIR No. 816/2016 registered at P.S. Nand Nagri. The Trial Court convicted the appellant for the offences punishable under Sec. 354 IPC and Sec. 8 POCSO. He was subsequently directed to undergo RI for a period of 3 years and 1 month along with paying a fine of Rs.2,000.00, in default whereof he would undergo 1 month SI, for the offence under Sec. 8 POCSO; and to undergo RI for a period of 1 year along with paying a fine of Rs.2,000.00, in default whereof he would undergo 1 month SI, for the offence under Sec. 354 IPC. Both sentences were directed to run concurrently and the benefit under Sec. 428 Cr.P.C. was granted to the appellant.

(2.) The facts as culled out from the Trial Court record are that the investigation was set into motion on 17/9/2016 when the complainant (father of the 10-year-old child victim) gave a written complaint that his minor daughter was molested by the appellant herein. It was stated that the complainant is a rickshaw puller and on the previous day, i.e., on 16/9/2016, at about 1.30 PM, he had gone along with his daughter to a bhandara in his neighborhood, where the appellant was also in attendance. At one point, the appellant put his hand on the waist of the complainant's daughter while standing behind her and placed his hand on her chest. Initially, the complainant thought that the appellant had done the said act out of affection; however, in the night, the victim complained to her mother that the appellant had pressed her breast and she was feeling pain. The matter was thereafter reported to the police and the subject FIR was lodged. The statements of the child victim under Ss. 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. were recorded. As there were no external or internal injuries, the complainant refused any medical examination of the child victim. On the chargesheet being filed, charges under Sec. 354 IPC and Sec. 10 POCSO were framed, to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

(3.) The prosecution examined the child victim as PW-1. She identified the appellant and stated that he used to live in her colony. On the date of incident, she had gone to the bhandara along with her father, where the appellant had come from behind and pressed her breast. She stated that she could not sleep that night due to the pain and confided in her mother about the same.