PIYAR UDDIN LASKAR Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Z. Alam, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Ms. A. Begum, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and Mr. M.H. Rajbarbhuiyan, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2.

(2.) This appeal is against the impugned judgment dtd. 7/4/2022, passed by the learned Special Judge, Hailakandi in Special (POCSO) Case No. 12 of 2018, arising out of Lala P.S. Case No. 212 of 2018, by which the appellant has been convicted under Sec. 4 of POCSO Act 2012, r/w Sec. 377 IPC, for having committed an offence of penetrative sexual assault upon the victim boy, aged 11 years.

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the evidence of the victim (PW- 1) is not corroborated by the evidence of his two friends (PW- 3 and PW- 5). He also submits that the evidence of the Doctor (PW- 4) is to the effect that semen had been found in the anal orifice of the victim, which was not sent to the FSL for examining whether it was human semen or otherwise. In any event, the evidence of PW- 1 is to the effect that the appellant had put his penis into the mouth of PW- 1 and had inserted his finger into the anus of PW-1. As only the finger of the appellant had been inserted into the anus of PW-1, there was no explanation as to how semen could have been found in the anus of the victim (PW- 1). He also submits that the statement of the victim (PW-1) made under Sec. 164 CrPC has not corroborated the testimony of the victim made before the learned Trial Court. He accordingly submits that due to the above reasons, the learned Trial Court erred in convicting the appellant under Sec. 4 of the POCSO Act, read with Sec. 377 IPC.