GANGTOK, India, June 25 -- Sikkim High Court issued the following judgment/order on June 19:

1. The appellant has suffered a conviction for repeatedly committing sexual assault on the victim under section 9(l) and for committing sexual assault being her guardian under section 9(n) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (the POCSO Act). He has also been convicted for committing rape repeatedly on the victim under section 376 (2) (n) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). He was sentenced to imprisonment for six years and fine of Rs.20,000/- under section 9(l) as well as under 9(n) of the POCSO Act. In default of payment of fine for the sentences the appellant was required to further undergo simple imprisonment for one year. The appellant was also sentenced to fifteen years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.25,000/- for commission of offence under section 376 (2) (n) IPC. In default he was to undergo simple imprisonment for one year. The learned Special Judge also recommended a payment of Rs.7 lakhs as compensation to the survivor under the Sikkim Compensation to Victims (or their Dependents) Scheme, 2021. The appellant has preferred this appeal challenging the conviction and sentences.

2. The introduction to the POCSO Act states that sexual offences against children are not adequately addressed by the existing laws. A large number of such offences are neither specifically provided for nor are they adequately penalised. Such offences against children need to be defined explicitly and countered through adequate penalties as an effective deterrence. The POCSO Act provides for protection of children for offences of sexual assault, sexual harassment and pornography with due regard for safeguarding the interest and well being of children.

3. Sexual exploitation and sexual abuse of children are heinous crimes and need to be effectively addressed.

Genesis of the prosecution 4. On 03.10.2023 the victims friend (P.W.9) informed the teacher (P.W.1) about the disclosure made by the victim (P.W.7) to her. The teacher (P.W.1) informed the victims class teacher (P.W.17) that the victims friend (P.W.9) had reported about the victim being harassed by the appellant. This matter was then reported to the Principals office. On the Principals advice the teacher (P.W.1) and the class teacher (P.W.17) took the victim to the police station. The victim was unable to open up at the police station. The police therefore, advised them to take the victim to the one stop centre. At the one stop centre the victim revealed to the case worker (P.W.8) that she was being sexually assaulted by her paternal uncle and there was also history of forceful sexual penetration on her and further that the last incident of sexual assault took place on 29.09.2023. As the police were all engaged that day, the case worker (P.W.8) went to the police station and lodged the First Information Report (FIR) (exhibit P-10) on the next day i.e. 04.10.2023 against the appellant. On the same day the victim was examined by the Medical Officer (P.W.16). The victim discloses to her that she used to stay with the appellant and his children at Sxxxx (name redacted) since childhood. During her childhood the appellant used to touch her over her private parts, but since last two months he advised her to stay in a separate room which previously counted as sitting room/guest room and after this incident when she shifted he usually came to her room and touched her private part and even had sexual intercourse with her several times. The last sexual intercourse took place on 29.09.2023. The victim also informed her that there was penetration of the penis into the vagina. The victim gave positive report for masturbation of the appellant by the victim/forced manipulation of genitals of appellant by the victim. She disclosed that ejaculation occurred outside body orifice-vaginal area. She also complained about touching and fondling of breast and vagina. These facts were recorded by the Medical Officer (P.W.16) in her medical report (exhibit P-23) dated 04.10.2023. On examination of the victim the Medical officer recorded that her labia majora was enlarged, in labia minora there was erythema of skin with ulcerative type vision on the inner mucosa of perineal region and had creamy coloured vaginal discharge. There was tear at the hymen perineum at 6 O clock position. The Medical Officer (P.W.16) was of the opinion that expert opinion/OBG consultation was required. Thereafter, on 09.10.2023 the victim was examined by the Consultant (P.W.15) Department of OBG. The victim informed the Consultant (P.W.15) that she had been molested by the appellant since childhood. He used to touch her body parts. They used to stay together. She was sexually assaulted multiple times by the appellant. She did not mention for how many years. The last incident of sexual abuse was on 29.09.2023 when he had come to her house at around 2300 hours to 0000 hours on the following day and forced her to sexual intercourse. The victim also informed the Consultant (P.W.15) that the appellant used to lure her with money. She usually would be sleeping at the time of the incident. The penetration was in her genitalia. She also gives positive report for masturbation of the appellant by the victim/forced manipulation of genitals of the appellant by the victim and the ejaculation used to occur outside the body orifice. There was touching and fondling of breast and vagina involved. There was history of vaginal discharge since the incident of sexual violence. She recorded this history as informed by the victim in her medico legal examination report (exhibit 21) proved by her. The Consultant (P.W.15) noted that the hymen perineum was found absent i.e. the hymen was not intact. Since the victim complained of itching and discharge in the par vagina, she prescribed sexually transmitted prevention treatment. According to the Consultant (P.W.15) once a person is exposed to recurrent sexual activity, there are complaints of itching and unusual discharge from the vagina and it is important for the person to get treatment. The Consultants (P.W.15) final opinion was that recent or past act of sexual intercourse could not be ruled out.

The rest of the document can be viewed at https://hcs.gov.in/hcs/hg_orders/202100000292024_9.pdf

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.