GAURI SHANKAR SHUKLA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Gauri Shankar challenges the impugned judgment dated 17th October 2016 convicting him for offence punishable under Section 10 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short Rs. POCSO Act') and the order on sentence dated 20th October 2016 directing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of 5,000/-, in default whereof to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months.

(2.) Assailing the conviction, Learned Counsel for the appellant contends that the prosecutrix is a tutored witness and has falsely implicated the appellant due to the landlord tenant dispute. Version of the prosecutrix is not corroborated by her MLC which does not show any injury. It is contended that even if held to be proved, the case of the appellant does not fall under the purview of Section 9(m) of the POCSO Act but under Section 7 of the POCSO Act and the appellant should be released on period already undergone.

(3.) Learned APP for the State on the other hand submits that it is not the case of the prosecutrix that the appellant committed rape on her. Her case is that the appellant put his hand in her underwear and when she raised alarm the appellant fled away. Thus, there would be no injury inflicted, to be noted in the MLC. Despite the prosecutrix being minor she has been consistent in her testimony. Her version is duly corroborated by her mother who was sleeping by her side. Since the prosecutrix was aged less than 12 years offence committed by the appellant falls within the ambit of Section 9(m) of POCSO Act and he has been rightly convicted for offence punishable under Section 10 POCSO Act, which prescribes a minimum sentence of imprisonment for a period of five years which has been awarded.