STATE OF SIKKIM Vs. LAKPA SHERPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State-Appellant is aggrieved by the acquittal of the Respondent of the offences under which he was charged, viz; Sec. 3(a) punishable under Sec. 4(2) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter, the 'POCSO Act'), Ss. 361 and 375, punishable under Ss. 363 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter, the 'IPC') respectively, vide the impugned Judgment dtd. 29/3/2022, in Sessions Trial (POCSO) Case No.10 of 2021 (State of Sikkim vs. Lakpa Sherpa), by the Court of the Learned Special Judge (POCSO Act), Mangan, North Sikkim.

(2.) We may briefly advert to the facts for clarity. FIR Exhibit 1, was lodged on 20/10/2021, before the jurisdictional P.S., where the alleged victim PW-3, informed that, on 17/10/2021 she returned home to 'S', a town in East Sikkim, where she resided with her mother and step-father, after having spent a week with her father and step-mother, in a village in North Sikkim. She returned to town 'S', to her mother and step-father, but on being reprimanded by them, she left the house and spent the night in her cousin's house, from where she planned to return to her father's house the next day. Her cousin, however advised her to return back to her mother, as her school would be re-opening, to that end, he stopped a truck and requested the driver, the Accused/Respondent, to reach her to place, 'Z', from where she would disembark and proceed home. The driver assured her cousin that, he would do so as he was going to Siliguri and town 'S' fell en route, where he would drop her instead of 'Z'. On reaching 'S', when she requested him to stop the vehicle, he told her that the Police would not permit him to halt and if she accompanied him to Siliguri, on their return he would stop the vehicle at 'S'. After completing his errands at Siliguri, they returned, but when she requested him to stop at 'S', he did not do so but took her to his room in an unknown place in North Sikkim, by which time it was around 02.00 a.m. Of the two beds in the room she occupied one. After the lights were switched off, the Respondent came to her bed and committed penetrative sexual assault on her. The next day she reserved a vehicle and went to the place, 'Z', where she was helped by one person to board a vehicle to the town 'S' and she reached home at 10.00 p.m. On 20/10/2021 she along with PW-18, her mother, went to the concerned Police Station in North Sikkim from where they were directed to the jurisdictional Police Station and the FIR was lodged.

(3.) The question that falls for determination by this Court is whether the Learned Trial Court was in error in acquitting the Respondent of the offences he was charged with.