DURGA BAHADUR GURUNG Vs. STATE OF SIKKIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 25.09.2017 passed by the learned Sessions Judge (POCSO Act), South Sikkim at Namchi in Sessions Trial (POCSO) Case No. 10 of 2015 convicting the appellant under Section 376(2)(f)/372(2)(i)/376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, the IPC) and sentencing him to undergo RI of 15 years for the offence committed under Section 376(2)(f) IPC, to suffer RI for 15 years for the offence committed under Section 376(2)(i) and to suffer RI for 15 years for the offence committed under Section 376(2)(n), providing that the sentences imposed will run concurrently. The learned Sessions Judge by the aforesaid impugned judgment acquitted the accused of the offence under Section 5(l)/ 5(j)(ii)/5(n) punishable under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012(for short, the POCSO Act).

(2.) The learned trial Court, relying on Exhibit-3, the birth certificate of the victim, had held that the date of birth of the victim girl is 02.07.1994. The reasoning assigned for acquitting the appellant of the offence under POCSO Act was that the victim girl had attained the age of 18 years in the month of July 2012 whereas the POCSO Act came into force on 14.11.2012.It was also observed that criminal law cannot be applied with retrospective effect.

(3.) In this case, the father is convicted for committing rape of his own daughter, resulting in birth of a child.