ASHIM STANISLAUS RAI Vs. STATE OF SIKKIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Appeal is preferred against the impugned Judgment and Order on Sentence, dated 22-09-2017, of the Learned Special Judge (POCSO), North Sikkim, at Mangan, in Sessions Trial (POCSO) Case No.01 of 2017. The Appellant, vide the Judgment was convicted under Section 354B, Section 376(2)(i), Section 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter, IPC) and Section 5(m)/6 and 5(f)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter, (POCSO Act, 2012).

(2.) The impugned sentence is as follows;

(3.) The facts are briefly being adverted to for clarity in the matter. On 04-06-2016, a written First Information Report (FIR), Exhibit 3, came to be lodged at the Mangan Police Station, North Sikkim, by P.W.2, the father of the minor victim, P.W.1, stating that, the Appellant a teacher in the victim's school had sexually assaulted the minor, aged about 9 years, on 03-06-2016, at around 11.30 a.m. or 12.30 p.m. Acting upon the Complaint, the Mangan Police Station on the same date registered Mangan P.S. Case under Sections 376/511 of the IPC read with Sections 4 and 8 of the POCSO Act, 2012, against the Appellant and endorsed it for investigation. Investigation revealed that the victim had been admitted to the residential school in the year 2012 and was in Class II at the relevant time. On 30-05-2016, around 2050 hours, when the victim along with other hostel students was studying in the hall, the Appellant called her and another student of Class II to the adjacent Boys' dormitory. After admonishing the boy for having teased the victim the Appellant dismissed him to the study hall, but held the victim back in the dimly lit room. He locked the door to the room and told her to lie down in the bunk bed in the room and thereupon sexually assaulted her by way of fondling and licking her vagina, kissing her mouth and cheeks. When he attempted to commit penetrative sexual assault by inserting his genital into hers, the victim resisted by biting one of his hands. He threatened to beat her should she reveal the incident to anyone indicating that he would use his belt for the purpose. In the meanwhile, another student knocked on the door of the room which afforded an opportunity to the victim to escape. She did not report the incident to anyone immediately, i.e., on 30-05- 2016, but on 31-05-2016 she informed her teacher, P.W.3 who in turn narrated it to P.W.6, P.W.7, P.W.8, P.W.10, the other teachers of the school. The Principal of the school, P.W.5, was out of station on 31-05-2016 and on her arrival the same evening, she was apprised of the matter by P.W.6 upon which she confirmed of it from the victim. As the Appellant was out of station on 01-06-2016, on his return that evening, P.W.5, the Principal, confronted him about the incident to which he admitted in the presence of Members of the School Children Committee, constituted by P.W.5. The Appellant executed a document admitting his guilt and signed on it which was duly countersigned by the five teachers, pursuant to which, he resigned from service. On completion of investigation, Charge-Sheet came to be filed against the Appellant under Section 4, 8 and 10 of the POCSO Act, 2012.