SH. LALHRIATTLUANGA Vs. STATE OF MIZORAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Vanlalnghaka, the learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the appellant. Also heard Mr. C. Zoramchhana, the learned Public Prosecutor, Mizoram appearing for the State respondents.

(2.) This is an appeal against the Judgment and Order dated 18.10.2017 passed by the Court of Special Judge, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), Champhai, Mizoram, whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 4 of the said Act and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs. 9000/-. In default of the payment of the fine, he has been directed to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a further period of three months.

(3.) The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 10.02.2015 at 10.30 am, one Sh. H. Ramdinsanga (PW1) submitted an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge of Champhai Police Station stating that in the last week of December, 2014, his granddaughter i.e., the prosecutrix was raped by her own father in their residence. He also made her suck his private parts. Prior to the incident, he had also raped her during the year 2014. He stated that he came to learn about the incident only on the evening of 08.02.2015. His granddaughter also informed him that the accused appellant had threatened her not to disclose any details about the incident. The complainant accordingly prayed that appropriate legal action be taken against the accused appellant for the crime he had committed. As a result, Champhai Police Station Case No. 8/2015 dated 10.02.2015 under Section 376 (2) IPC read with Section 4 of the POCSO Act was registered and the matter investigated into. Upon completion of the investigation, the Investigating Authority having found a prima facie case against the appellant under Section 4 of the POCSO Act filed the charge sheet. On receiving the chargesheet, the Court of Special Judge under POCSO Act on 07.09.2015 framed charge against the appellant under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and to which, the appellant was recorded to have partially pleaded guilty and claimed for trial. Following the framing of charge, trial against the appellant began. During the trial, the prosecution in order to establish their case examined as many as 9 prosecution witnesses while the appellant did not adduce any evidence to defend himself apart from cross examining the prosecution witnesses only. Upon conclusion of the evidence stage, the appellant was examined by the Court under Section 313 of the CrPC and thereafter, the Trial Court heard the parties and passed the impugned Judgment and Order dated 18.10.2017 convicting and sentencing the appellant in the manner as already stated herein above.