RABIN BURMAN Vs. STATE OF SIKKIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Conviction of the Appellant, who had been given shelter by his employer, the unfortunate father of the hapless child, at his own residence, is under Appeal in the present case having been convicted by the Court of the Special Judge, East District at Gangtok under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act, 2012) for having committed the offence of sexual assault on a girl child, the victim herein, as well as under Section 354 A and 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) in the very same house in which he was given shelter.

(2.) Mr. Sonam Palden, learned Counsel appearing for the convict, now the Appellant, fairly submits, at the very outset, that he does not wish to challenge the conviction considering the nature of evidence available. The Learned Special Judge has found that from the testimony of the child (P.W.1) and her father (P.W.2) which is supported by the medical evidence (exhibit-8) it is clear that the Appellant had tried to disrobe the child and had physically and sexually assaulted her on the night of 01.07.2015 at her house. The Learned Special Judge has also found that the victim was a child within the meaning of Section 2 (d) of the POCSO Act, 2012. The conviction of the Appellant by the learned Special Judge under the aforesaid provisions of law thus stands confirmed.

(3.) However, the Appellant is aggrieved by the order on sentence, dated 23.05.2016 imposing the maximum punishment of imprisonment prescribed under each of the offences for which he stands convicted as well as the direction that the sentences should run consecutively.