Conviction under POCSO Act Sustainable on Prosecutrix’s Sole Testimony Corroborated by Section 164 Statement

On July 9, 2023, the appellant entered the victim's house, sent her minor brother away with money, and committed penetrative sexual assault on the 11-year-old victim

The victim narrated the incident to her mother, who subsequently lodged an FIR on July 10, 2023

The Trial Court convicted the appellant under Section 6 of the POCSO Act (20 years RI) and Section 448 of the IPC (6 months RI)

The appellant appealed on grounds of non-examination of the victim's brother (an ocular witness), non-examination of the medical officer, and alleged political rivalry

1. Whether the non-examination of the victim’s minor brother and the medical examiner was fatal to the prosecution's case

2. Whether the absence of physical injuries and the sole testimony of the prosecutrix are sufficient to sustain a conviction under the POCSO Act

3. Whether the charge of house trespass under Section 448 IPC was sufficiently proved

Section 6 of the POCSO Act (Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault) and Section 448 of the IPC (House Trespass)

Conviction for sexual assault can be based on the sole, consistent testimony of the prosecutrix if it qualifies as "sterling witness" evidence, as established in Rai Sandeep alias Deepu v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2012) 8 SCC 21

Medical reports are corroborative, they do not override clear ocular and oral testimony

The Court rejected the appellant's argument regarding the non-examination of the victim’s brother, noting that the brother was only six years old and the prosecution was not mandated to produce a child witness when other evidence was sufficient

Regarding the non-examination of the medical officer, the Court held that since the medical report (indicating a wide vaginal opening) was already exhibited and was not contradictory to the victim's testimony, the officer's absence did not dent the case

The Court found the victim's testimony "sterling," as her evidence in trial was perfectly corroborated by her Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement and her mother's testimony

The Court dismissed the defense of political rivalry as unsubstantiated, noting the appellant failed to provide an alibi for his presence during the time of occurrence

The lack of physical injuries was deemed irrelevant given the age gap and the element of intimidation

The Court affirmed the conviction under Section 6 of POCSO and Section 448 IPC, ruling that the evidence of the prosecutrix was reliable and corroborated by circumstances. The appeal and the application for reduction of sentence were dismissed.

Lower court records were ordered to be returned