Sentences Modified from 15 to 10 Years for Convicts in PoCSO Act Violation
In a significant judgment, the Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction of Navdeep @ Sonu and others in a harrowing case involving gang penetrative sexual assault against a minor. The bench, presided over by Justice Chandrasekharan Sudha, confirmed the guilt of the accused under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (PoCSO) Act, 2012, while modifying the sentences from 15 years to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment.
The case dates back to incidents occurring over a year prior to June 23, 2017, wherein the accused repeatedly assaulted the victim, leveraging threats of exposing an alleged obscene video to ensure the victim's silence. The judgment emphasized that even if only one accused committed the penetrative sexual assault, others involved with a common intention are equally liable under Section 5(g) of the PoCSO Act.
The court, highlighting the consistent testimony of the victim, corroborated by medical evidence, dismissed arguments from the defense regarding fabrication of evidence and manipulation of DNA samples. The judgment underscored the reliability of the victim's sole testimony, which sufficed for conviction, despite the absence of the alleged video evidence.
Justice Sudha noted that separate sentences under Section 377 IPC and Section 6 of the PoCSO Act are not permissible, directing punishment under one enactment only, as per Section 71 IPC and Section 26 of the General Clauses Act, 1897. The reduction in sentence was justified considering the age of the accused and circumstances surrounding the case.
While the judgment acknowledged deficiencies in the investigation process, it maintained that defective investigation does not absolve the accused, especially when the prosecution's evidence remains credible and compelling. The decision serves as a stern reminder of the judiciary's commitment to upholding justice in cases of sexual assault, ensuring that perpetrators are held accountable for their actions.
Bottom Line:
Conviction under Section 377 IPC and Section 6 of the PoCSO Act upheld while modifying the sentence.
Statutory provision(s): Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Section 6, Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 377, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 415(2), Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 34, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 313(1)(b), Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 232, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 207, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 294, Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 71, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 428, General Clauses Act, 1897 Section 26.
Navdeep @ Sonu v. State (NCT of Delhi), (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc id # 2871111
