LALIT SUBBA Vs. STATE OF SIKKIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A girl child, aged about six years at the time of the incident, was the victim of sexual assault, perpetrated on her by the Appellant, aged about forty years, when they were residing in residential quarters situated close to each other.

(2.) The Learned Trial Court in the impugned Judgment settled seven questions for determination, viz.;

(3.) Assailing the Judgment of the Learned Special Judge (POCSO Act), Mangan District, Sikkim, in Sessions Trial (POCSO Act) Case No.03 of 2023 and Order on Sentence, both dtd. 30/9/2023, Learned Counsel for the Appellant emphasised that the victim stated that her aunt took her to the DCPU, but the FIR reveals that it was her mother. Her aunt was not named as a Prosecution witness. In the FIR, the victim has stated the age of the accused, revealing that she was tutored. The evidence of PWs 16 and 17 are devoid of reference to any sexual assault by the Appellant, although the victim claims in her Sec. 164 Cr.P.C. statement to have been playing with their children in their living room, with the Appellant also present. The Learned Trial Court itself has found that the witness is not a 'sterling witness', in view of her contradictory evidence in her Sec. 164 Cr.P.C. statement and before the Court. That, the evidence of PWs 6 and 7 does not reveal that the Appellant had violated the private parts of PW-1. That, despite the offence having been committed as alleged, PW-1 did not raise an alarm after the incident, but went back to playing nor was she absent from School thereafter. The evidence of the victim being inconsistent, it is unreliable and the Appellant thereby deserves an acquittal.