Convictions of Co-accused Overturned Due to Lack of Evidence; Main Accused's Sentence Reduced to 14 Years
In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, has partially allowed the appeal of Anku @ Parshuram, modifying his life sentence to 14 years of rigorous imprisonment in a POCSO case. The co-accused, Santosh Kumar Gautam and Pintu @ Dinesh, have been acquitted due to insufficient evidence.
The case, originating from a 2014 incident, involved the abduction and sexual assault of a minor girl. The trial court had convicted Anku @ Parshuram under Sections 363, 366, 376 of the IPC, and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, sentencing him to life imprisonment. The co-accused were similarly convicted under Sections 363 and 366 IPC.
The High Court, led by Justices Rajan Roy and Rajeev Bharti, found that the trial court erred in imposing separate sentences under both IPC and POCSO Act provisions for the same act, which violated Section 42 of the POCSO Act. This section mandates punishment under the provision providing greater punishment, not cumulative sentencing.
The court noted that the prosecutrix's testimony was credible and consistent, justifying the conviction of Anku @ Parshuram. However, they highlighted the absence of corroborative evidence against Santosh and Pintu, leading to their acquittal.
Anku @ Parshuram's sentence was recalibrated considering mitigating factors such as his age, lack of prior criminal record, and family responsibilities. The judgment emphasized that while the crime's severity warranted serious punishment, the absence of exceptional aggravating factors justified the sentence modification.
The court also addressed procedural issues, ensuring the appellant's rights were not prejudiced by the inability to cross-examine certain witnesses independently. The judgment balanced the need for justice with adherence to procedural fairness.
The ruling underscores the judiciary's commitment to ensuring justice through careful consideration of legal provisions and individual circumstances, while also safeguarding the rights of the accused.
Bottom line:-
Conviction under Section 376 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act requires punishment under the provision providing greater punishment, as per Section 42 of the POCSO Act.
Statutory provision(s): Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(i); Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, Section 6; Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 374(2), 164, 161, 313, 437A, 428; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Section 468
Anku @ Parshuram v. State of U.P., (Allahabad)(DB)(Lucknow) : Law Finder Doc id # 2934487
