Court confirms conviction under POCSO and IPC, relying on victim’s testimony, neighbour witnesses, and forensic DNA evidence linking accused to the offence.
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has dismissed the appeal of Shyam Veer and upheld his conviction and sentence for aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a child below 12 years of age, along with conviction for unnatural offence under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code.
A Division Bench of Justice Vivek Singh Thakur and Justice Ranjan Sharma affirmed the trial court’s judgment dated 25 March 2022 and sentencing order dated 28 March 2022, by which the appellant was sentenced to 20 years’ rigorous imprisonment under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and 10 years’ rigorous imprisonment under Section 377 IPC. The court directed that both sentences would run concurrently.
According to the prosecution, the incident took place on 27 April 2020 during the nationwide COVID-19 lockdown. The victim, a child below eight years of age, was playing near the appellant’s room when a neighbour allegedly saw the accused take the child inside. After some time, the child emerged walking with difficulty and was later found cleaning his anus. When questioned by his father, the child disclosed that the appellant had taken him into the room, made him lie on the bed, opened his pants, and inserted his private part into the child’s anus, causing severe pain.
The prosecution case was supported by the testimony of the child’s parents, neighbours, the landlord’s family, the medical officer, and investigating officers. The victim’s statement under Section 164 CrPC was also recorded. The court noted that the child’s date of birth certificate established that he was below 12 years of age at the time of the offence.
A key part of the prosecution evidence was the forensic report. The State Forensic Science Laboratory found human semen on the victim’s pants and on the appellant’s underwear. DNA profiling further showed that the DNA profile from the victim’s clothing matched the appellant’s blood sample. The High Court held that this scientific evidence strongly corroborated the oral testimony and circumstances of the case.
The appellant argued that there was no medical injury on the child’s body and that the case was motivated by enmity with a neighbour. The court rejected these submissions, observing that absence of visible injury does not rule out penetrative sexual assault under the POCSO Act. It also found no credible evidence of enmity or false implication. The Bench noted that the prosecution witnesses were natural witnesses and their evidence was consistent and trustworthy.
Bottom Line :
Conviction for aggravated penetrative sexual assault under POCSO Act upheld; minimum sentence of 20 years' rigorous imprisonment imposed for assaulting a child below 12 years of age.
Interpreting Sections 3, 5(m), and 6 of the POCSO Act, the court held that even the slightest penetration of the penis into the anus of a child amounts to penetrative sexual assault, and when the victim is below 12
Shyam Veer v. State of Himachal Pradesh, (HP)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2979589
