Release of Co-Sureties’ Properties Bars Revival in Debt Recovery Proceedings: Karnataka High Court Rajasthan High Court Permits Summoning of Tower Location Records of Police Officials in Corruption Case ISF's Public Meeting | Freedom of Speech and Assembly Is Fundamental but Subject to Reasonable Restrictions: Calcutta High Court Single Blow Aimed at a Vital Part With Dangerous Weapon Constitutes Murder Under Section 302 IPC: Kerala High Court Orissa High Court Quashes FIR Against Law Students Over Ragging Incident Pre-Trial Detention Cannot Be Punitive; Bail is the Rule, Jail the Exception: Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Accused in ₹3.06 Crore Forgery Case Collector's Actions in No Confidence Motion Held Illegal; Cost Imposed on State for Abdication of Statutory Duties: Allahabad High Court Judiciary as Guardian of the Constitution Must Address Failures in Law Enforcement: P&H High Court Demands Action Plan on 79,000 FIRs Pending Beyond Statutory Period NDPS | Presence of Contraband in Taxi Alone Is Not Proof of Guilt: Supreme Court Auction Purchaser’s Title Cannot Be Defeated by Unregistered Documents or Unsubstantiated Claims: Supreme Court Overturns High Court Order Land Acquisition | Section 28A Application Maintainable Based on Appellate Court’s Enhanced Compensation: Allahabad High Court Supreme Court Dissolves Marriage Using Article 142: ₹25 Lakh Settlement Ends All Pending Cases Common Intention Requires No Prior Planning; May Arise During the Incident: Supreme Court TESTIMONY OF PROSECUTRIX MUST "INSPIRE CONFIDENCE": SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS ACQUITTAL IN RAPE CASE

Acquits Appellant in POCSO Case - Discrepancies in Prosecutrix's Testimony: Gauhati High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Gauhati High Court acquitted the appellant, Asuruddin Khan, in a POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences) case, highlighting discrepancies in the testimony of the prosecutrix. The judgment, delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Parthivjyoti Saikia on 5th June 2023, set aside the appellant's conviction under Section 4 of the POCSO Act and ordered his immediate release.

The case involved allegations of sexual offense against a minor. According to the prosecution, the prosecutrix, a 14-year-old girl, had been summoned by Saheda Khatun to her house on 14th August 2016. It was alleged that the appellant had sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix on the promise of marriage. The prosecutrix lodged an FIR, and during the trial, she provided a statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

However, during the trial, discrepancies emerged in the prosecutrix's versions of the incident. The statement given under Section 164 CrPC indicated consensual intercourse, whereas her trial testimony suggested forceful intercourse with threats. The court noted these inconsistencies and observed that the evidence of the prosecutrix failed to inspire confidence. The court also took into account the father's statement regarding the appellant's refusal to recognize the prosecutrix when she called him after the incident.

After evaluating the evidence, the High Court concluded that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant had committed the offense with a criminal intention. The court opined that the prosecutrix seemed to be a consenting party to the act of the appellant and embellished her evidence to ensure his punishment.

In the judgment, the court held, "The evidence of the prosecutrix failed to inspire confidence. The prosecution evidence failed to prove the offense against the appellant beyond all reasonable doubt." Accordingly, the appeal was allowed, the conviction was set aside, and the appellant was acquitted. If the appellant was in custody, the court ordered for his immediate release.

This judgment raises important considerations regarding the evaluation of evidence in POCSO cases and the need for consistency and reliability in witness testimony. The court's decision highlights the importance of ensuring that evidence meets the threshold of proof beyond reasonable doubt before convicting an accused.

The judgment serves as a reminder that while protecting the rights of victims is crucial, the principles of justice and fairness must also be upheld. The acquittal of the appellant in this case emphasizes the necessity for a meticulous examination of evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt in criminal cases.

Date of Decision: 5th June 2023.

ASURUDDIN KHAN vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR

Similar News