Court Affirms Credibility of Minor Victim's Testimony Despite Allegations of Tutoring and Delayed FIR
In a significant judgment, the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, upheld the conviction of Baliram Sitaram Chavan for sexual offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The court, presided over by Justice Abhay S. Waghwase, dismissed Chavan's appeal against his conviction by a Special POCSO Court in Aurangabad.
The case revolved around the accusations against Chavan, who was alleged to have committed sexual acts against a minor girl who had visited his shop to purchase biscuits. The prosecution's case was primarily built on the testimony of the minor victim and her mother, which the trial court found credible and reliable despite minor contradictions.
The appellant's counsel argued that the victim's testimony was unreliable due to alleged tutoring and inconsistencies. They also highlighted a delay of 17-18 hours in lodging the FIR, suggesting it was a result of false and embellished accusations. However, the High Court noted that the delay was adequately explained given the parents' circumstances, being poor and illiterate villagers residing far from the police station.
The court emphasized that in cases involving sexual offences against minors, delays in lodging FIRs are not unusual and do not necessarily undermine the credibility of the allegations. Furthermore, the absence of physical injuries was deemed inconsequential to the nature of the offence, as corroborated by medical documents admitted by the defense.
Justice Waghwase reiterated that the victim's testimony, despite being in question-answer form and her admission of memorizing her statement, remained steadfast and consistent. The court found no merit in the appellant's argument of improbability due to the accused's family presence at the premises, noting the lack of evidence to support such a claim.
The High Court concluded that the trial court had meticulously appreciated the evidence, particularly the testimony of the minor victim and her mother, upholding the findings that the victim was a minor as defined under the POCSO Act.
In dismissing the appeal, the court ordered that the fees for the counsel representing the respondent through legal aid be paid by the High Court Legal Services Sub-Committee, Aurangabad, according to the rules.
Bottom Line :
Conviction for offences under Section 376A and 506 of IPC and Sections 4(2) and 6(1) of the POCSO Act upheld. Testimony of minor victim, corroborated by her mother, found credible despite allegations of tutoring and delayed FIR. Delay in lodging FIR in cases involving sexual offences against minors considered insignificant due to specific circumstances of illiterate and poor parents residing far from the police station.
Statutory provision(s): Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 376A, 506; Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Sections 4(2), 6(1); Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 164; Evidence Act, 1872.
