The Tripura High Court upheld the order of acquittal passed by the trial judge to the person accused under POCSO and held that the prosecution is required to prove the guilt of the accused beyond the shadow of a doubt in a criminal case and in the present case, the prosecution has not been able to prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt.
Brief Facts:
The state filed an appeal under Section (1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, against the impugned Judgment & Order of acquittal passed by the trial court which acquitted the person accused of charges under Section(B)(I) of IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act.
Contentions of the Applicant:
The learned counsel appearing for the state contended that the findings of the trial court were perverse, arbitrary, and unreasonable and the trial court while coming to the conclusion only depended on the medical evidence and the medical opinion was just corroborative in nature. It was further contended that the victim was only fifteen years at the time of the commission of the offence.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The learned counsel appearing for the accused contended that neither the victim nor her parents had stated the date of the birth of the victim and the age was not verified. It was further argued that there was no evidence of recent sexual intercourse as per medical evidence and the evidence of the prosecution witnesses did not corroborate each other.
Observations of the Court:
The court observed that as per various materials available on record, it is clear that the victim and accused were in a love relationship. The court further stated that as per the medical examination and the forensic examination, it was not established that there was any sexual intercourse committed on the victim and the testimonies of the victim and mother were thus not supported by medical evidence.
the court further stated that the prosecution witnesses stated that the victim was only fifteen years of age at the time of the commission of the offence but no specific date of birth or any other record was produced to support the same. The court observed that the prosecution is required to prove the guilt of the accused beyond the shadow of a doubt in a criminal case and in the present case, the prosecution has not been able to prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt.
The decision of the Court:
The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the impugned order which acquitted the appellant of the charges.
Case Title: The State of Tripura v Sri Binoy Debbarma.
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice T. Amarnath Goud
Case No.: CRL.A No.10 OF 2022
Advocate for the Applicant: Mr. S. Debnath
Advocate for the Respondent: Ms. V. Poddar
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
