A single-judge bench of Justice Sarang V Kotwal passed an order in an appeal by the man who was in November, 2017, convicted by special POCSO Act court in the city for offences punishable under section 354 (assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and section 8 (sexual assault) of the POCSO Act. He was sentenced to five years of rigorous imprisonment. The Bombay High Court, while dismissing an appeal of a man convicted for sexual assault of a five-year-old girl in 2013, recently said that as per the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, even touching the private parts with sexual intent is sufficient to construe it as sexual assault.
The court noted that the absence of injury mentioned in the victim’s medical certificate will not make any difference to her case as the crime fell within the purview of the POCSO Act.
A single-judge bench of Justice Sarang V Kotwal passed an order in an appeal by the man who was in November, 2017, convicted by special POCSO Act court in the city for offences punishable under section 354 (assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and section 8 (sexual assault) of the POCSO Act. He was sentenced to five years of rigorous imprisonment.
As per the prosecution, in December 2013, the man picked up the girl from outside her house where she was playing with her friends, and touched and pinched her private parts.
Subscriber Only Stories
The girl later narrated the incident to her mother, who took her to the hospital and later, the police station.
The mother lodged an FIR and the victim’s statement was also recorded under section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). The appellant was apprehended by the people from the locality and was brought to the police station, after which he was arrested.
In his defence, the appellant, through advocate Sushant Mhatre, stated that he was falsely implicated by the girl’s father following a quarrel with him. Mhatre argued that the FIR was filed with a two-day delay, adding the same remained unexplained. Mhatre added that the medical examination of the victim did not reveal any injury and therefore, the prosecution’s case was doubtful and his conviction be set aside.
After perusing the submissions, Justice Kotwal noted, “The victim has described the incident in sufficient detail. The victim appears to be a truthful witness. There was no possibility of the victim identifying the appellant wrong. The absence of injury mentioned in the medical certificate will not make any difference to her case because the very nature of the offence of sexual assault defined under Section 7 of the POCSO Act mentions that even touching private part with sexual intent is sufficient to attract the provisions of Section 7 read with Section 8 of the POCSO Act.”
The bench held, “In this case, the ocular evidence of the victim and her mother inspires confidence and there is no reason to doubt their versions. The defence of the appellant does not really help his cause. Thus, considering all these aspects, no case for interference with the impugned judgment and order is made out. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.”
The court clarified that in case the appellant has already completed his substantive sentence, he will be released if he is not required in any other case.