HANIF ALI Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. A. Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Also heard Ms. A. Begum, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State respondent and Ms. S. Medhi, learned legal Aid Counsel appearing for the informant/respondent No. 2.

(2.) The appellant has put to challenge the impugned judgment dtd. 8/4/2022 passed by the court of the Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (POCSO), Barpeta, in Special POCSO Case No. 30/2018, by which the appellant has been convicted under Sec. 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 12 years with a fine of Rs.10,000.00, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for another 1 year.

(3.) The appellant's case is that the victim, who was 7 years of age, has not named the appellant as the perpetrator of the crime in her statements made under Sec. 161 and Sec. 164 Cr.P.C. Further, there is no allegation of penetration of the private parts of the victim by the private parts of the appellant in the above two statements. The further case of the appellant is that charge had initially been framed under Sec. 8 of the POCSO Act, 2012, against the appellant on 26/11/2018. However, the charge was subsequently altered to Sec. 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012, on 31/3/2022, i.e., after recording the evidence of the witnesses and examination of the appellant had been undertaken under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C on 5/3/2021.