SH. BEIRYRAITHAI Vs. STATE OF MIZORAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Criminal Appeal preferred against the Judgment convicting the appellant dtd. 28/2/2023 as well as the sentencing Order dtd. 2/3/2023 passed by the Special Court (POCSO Act), Siaha District, Mizoram by which the appellant was convicted under Sec. 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Act, 2012 ( hereinafter referred to as 'the POCSO Act' ) and was sentenced to undergo a Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 10 (ten) years with a fine of Rs.10,000.00( Rupees Ten Thousand ) and in default of the said fine, Simple Imprisonment for another period of 2 (two) months.

(2.) The prosecution case as is revealed from the First Information Report (FIR) dtd. 21/11/2018 is that the daughter of the informant being 16 years of age was raped by her teacher i.e. the appellant on 15/11/2018 at around 7:30 pm in a house below the house of the victim. The said FIR was lodged by the mother of the victim. On receipt of the FIR, the police registered the case as SHA-PS Case No. 95 of 2018 under Sec. 6 of the POCSO Act and investigated the case. On completion of the investigation, the Police filed charge-sheet vide charge-sheet No. 101 of 2018 on 14/12/2018.Thereafter, on completion of the necessary requirements under the law, the learned Special Court (POCSO Act), Siaha District framed the charge against the appellant under Sec. 6 of the POCSO Act, on 18/3/2019. Thereafter the trial proceeded and the accused was examined under Sec. 313 of the Cr.PC and the learned Trial Court after completion of the trial, convicted the appellant as mentioned above. It is this judgment and order passed by the Special Court (POCSO Act), Siaha which is put to challenge by the appellant before this Court.

(3.) The Trial Court during the trial had examined seven prosecution witnesses and one defense witness to prove the case. PW-1 is the mother of the victim and the complainant and she stated that on 16/11/2018, her mother with whom the victim lived, called her up and informed her that some bad incident had happened and that the appellant had visited her asking for apology. This witness however, requested her mother not to take any actions till she reaches and that this witness proceeded to her mother's house and after hearing the incident lodged the First Information Report (FIR). This witness as such is a hearsay witness and whatever she stated was as informed to her both by her mother and her daughter.