RAJ KUMAR YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal, the appellant/convicted accused is challenging the Judgment and Order dtd. 15/12/2021 passed by the learned Special Judge under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Araria, in Special POCSO Case No.36 of 2021, thereby convicting him of the offences punishable under Sec. 376 AB of the Indian Penal Code as well as under Sec. 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'POCSO Act' for the sake of brevity). For the offence punishable under Sec. 376 AB of the Indian Penal Code, the appellant/convicted accused is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life which is to mean imprisonment for reminder of the natural life of the convict apart from imposition of fine of Rs.10,000.00 and in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for ten days. In view of the provisions of Sec. 42 of the POCSO Act, no separate sentence came to be imposed for the offence punishable under Sec. 4 thereof. For the sake of convenience, the appellant shall be referred to in his original capacity as 'an accused'.

(2.) Facts leading to the prosecution of the accused can be gathered thus:

(3.) We heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/accused at sufficient length of time. By relying on the Judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Md. Major @ Mejar Vs. State of Bihar reported in 2022 (5) BLJ 302 (to which one of us-Justice A.M. Badar is a party), it is argued on behalf of the appellant that the impugned Judgment and Order is per se illegal in the light of provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution of India so also on account of breach of mandatory provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. It is further argued that the same is in blatant violation of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Anokhilal Versus State of Madhya Pradesh reported in (2019) 20 Superme Court Cases 196.