PAWAN KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present appeal, the appellant challenges the impugned judgment dated 26th July, 2016 convicting him for the offence punishable under Section 4 of Protection of Children against Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short 'POCSO Act') and Sections 363/366A/376(1) IPC and the order on sentence dated 30th July, 2016 directing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 30 days for the offence punishable under Section 4 of POCSO Act and rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each and in default whereof to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 30 days for the offences punishable under Sections 363/366A IPC. No separate sentence was awarded for the offence punishable under Section 376(1) IPC.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that neither the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. nor in Court, thus, the appellant deserves to be acquitted. Further, conviction cannot be based on the sole testimony of the mother of the victim who is an interested witness.

(3.) Learned APP for the State on the other hand contends that there is no illegality in the impugned judgment and order on sentence. Prosecution case stands proved beyond reasonable doubt on the basis of the testimony of mother of victim coupled with the MLC of the victim and DNA analysis report.