Meghalaya High Court upholds POCSO conviction, reduces fine in 2015 child assault case
The Meghalaya High Court has upheld the conviction and three-year imprisonment of a man for sexually assaulting a 12-year-old girl in 2015, while reducing the fine imposed on him from Rs 5,000 to Rs 1,000. The division bench, headed by Chief Justice Revati Mohite Dere, passed the order on September 16 while hearing the accused’s appeal against the judgment of the Special Judge (POCSO), East Khasi Hills, Shillong.
The case relates to an incident on June 20, 2015, when the survivor, then a Class V student, was allegedly assaulted at her home. Her mother lodged an FIR at Madanrting police station on June 23. The case was initially registered under Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, while the subsequent chargesheet invoked Section 5(m) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act and Section 450 of the IPC. The Special POCSO Court convicted the accused in December 2023 and sentenced him to three years’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 5,000.
During the appeal, the defence questioned the credibility and corroboration of the survivor’s testimony and referred to the three-day gap between the incident and registration of the FIR. The defence also sought a lenient view of the sentence, citing the accused’s age of 48 at the time of the incident.
The prosecution argued that the survivor’s evidence was sufficient to establish the offence, noting that such incidents generally take place in private and may not have independent eyewitnesses.
The High Court found the survivor’s testimony credible and said it was duly corroborated by the evidence of her mother and younger brother. The court noted that key portions of her account had not been challenged during cross-examination. The survivor told the court that the accused called her into the sitting room and touched her inappropriately.
Her nine-year-old brother also testified that he saw the accused sitting close to his sister with his left hand around her shoulder. The survivor’s mother said she found her daughter crying after returning home and was told that the accused had touched her by putting his hand inside her clothes.
The court also rejected the argument concerning the delay in filing the FIR, noting that the incident had first been reported to the Rangbah Shnong, who advised the family to approach the police. It held that there was no unexplained delay.
The survivor’s age was established through her birth certificate issued by the Diengpasoh PHC, and her status as a minor was not disputed during the proceedings. The High Court held that the proved act constituted an offence under Section 8 of the POCSO Act.