MEHUN LAMURONG Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal arises out of a judgment of conviction of April 15, 2021 and the resultant sentence under which the appellant herein has been condemned to rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years under Sec. 5(m) and (n) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 read with Sec. 6 thereof. The appellant has also been fined Rs.10,000.00 and, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a further year. At the time that the appellant was sentenced, he had already undergone nearly three years and three months of detention.

(2.) The appellant claims that there is no evidence of penetrative sexual assault and even the survivor asserted that the appellant did not insert his penis into her vagina. The appellant refers to the inconclusive forensic science laboratory report and the absence of any firm opinion in the report of the medical expert who conducted an examination on the survivor immediately upon the first information report being lodged. The appellant also contends that at least two key witnesses were not examined by the prosecution and, as such, the real truth did not come out. These two persons who were not examined were the mother of the appellant and a sister of the appellant.

(3.) The appellant seeks to suggest that the survivor contradicted herself in the two statements that she rendered, first under Sec. 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and, next, in her deposition at the trial. The appellant points out that while the survivor initially said that the appellant invited the survivor to join a dance programme in the village, in her testimony at the trial she did not refer to such invitation and made out a case that the appellant followed the survivor when the survivor was going from her cousin's place to her aunt's.