Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction in POCSO Case; Victim's Sole Testimony Found Credible

Court affirms 7-year sentence for sexual assault, emphasizing sufficiency of credible child witness testimony without need for corroboration.

In a significant judgment, the Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction of a man accused of sexually assaulting a minor, emphasizing that the credible and reliable testimony of a child victim is sufficient for conviction without the need for corroboration. The case, titled Irfan v. State, involved the appellant, Irfan, challenging his conviction by the Additional Sessions Judge for offenses under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, as well as Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

The incident dates back to June 17, 2013, when the victim, a minor at the time, was allegedly assaulted by Irfan, who was residing in the same building as the victim's family. The appellant was accused of forcibly taking the victim to a vacant room, where he committed the assault. The victim, fearful due to threats made by the appellant against her brother, initially remained silent. However, her subsequent change in demeanour prompted her mother to inquire, leading to the revelation of the incident and the subsequent police report.

The High Court, presided by Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri, dismissed the appeal, stating that the victim's testimony was coherent, consistent, and credible throughout the proceedings, from her initial police statement to her court deposition. The court noted that the testimony did not require corroboration, aligning with precedent set by the Supreme Court in similar cases. The court further observed that minor inconsistencies in the timing of the incident did not undermine the victim's credibility, acknowledging the natural variations in human memory.

Medical evidence, including the examination conducted four days post-incident, recorded a torn hymen, supporting the victim's allegations despite the absence of external injuries. The forensic report, which did not detect semen, was deemed inconsequential due to the delay in examination.

In his defense, the appellant argued that the prosecution's case was unreliable due to the non-examination of the victim's mother, discrepancies in the reported timings of the incident, and an alleged monetary dispute. However, the court found these arguments unpersuasive, emphasizing that the victim's fear-induced silence and later disclosure were reasonable under the circumstances.

The court also reiterated legal principles concerning child witness testimonies, as recently elaborated by the Supreme Court, underscoring that a child witness's testimony, if credible and reliable, suffices for conviction without corroboration.

Concluding the judgment, the Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal, upheld the trial court's sentence, and directed the appellant to be taken into custody to serve the sentence. The court also expressed appreciation for the assistance provided by the amicus curiae in the case.

Bottom Line:

Testimony of a child victim and sole witness of sexual assault, if credible and reliable, is sufficient for conviction without requiring corroboration. Threats and delayed reporting do not negate the credibility of such testimony.

Statutory provision(s):  Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 376, 506; Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Section 4; Evidence Act, 1872 Section 118

Irfan v. State, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2811955