Add thelocalreport.in As A Trusted Source
New Delhi, Nov 14 (IANS) The Supreme Court has upheld the conviction of a man for sexually assaulting a four-year-old girl under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses (POCSO) Act.
A bench of Justices Arvind Kumar and NV Anjaria confirmed the concurrent findings of the trial court and the Chhattisgarh High Court, holding that the evidence on record “establishes the commission of the offence” and does not require any interference.
A bench led by Justice Kumar said, “The appreciation of the evidence of the trial court and consideration of the same by the high court can be said to be extremely legal and proper, which does not require any interference by this court.”
However, taking into account the time already served, the top court modified the sentence and ordered him “to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 6 years instead”. According to the prosecution, the child’s mother found the appellant-accused Dinesh Kumar Jaldhari inside their house “wearing half shorts and sitting near the feet of her minor daughter”, where the four-year-old girl was crying after removing her clothes and complaining of pain in her private parts.
While upholding the findings of the courts below, the bench led by Justice Kumar relied on the testimony of the parents, noting that “there is no good reason not to disbelieve the account and description given by PW-3 – the victim’s mother – of the incident”.
The Supreme Court also took note of the trauma displayed by the child during her testimony before the trial court, noting that she was visibly distressed and refused to even look at the accused after his mask was removed. “The fact that the victim was in a state of fear upon seeing the accused is in itself an indicator,” the judgment said. It also said that the entire incident “illustrates” the psychological impact of the attack on a four-year-old child.
Rejecting the appellant’s contention that the absence of external injuries had weakened the prosecution’s case, the Justice Kumar-led bench reaffirmed that consistent and solid eye evidence should prevail. The top court reiterated, “The medical evidence will be outweighed and even if it does not match the ophthalmological evidence, where the ophthalmological evidence is consistent and solid, the latter will be allowed to prevail”.
The Supreme Court concluded that the conviction under Sections 9(m) and 10 of the POCSO Act was fully justified. However, noting that the appellant has already undergone “approximately 4 years and 5 months” of imprisonment, the bench led by Justice Kumar reduced the sentence from seven to six years without interfering with the fine and default sentence.
–IANS
PDS/UK