Credible Testimony of Minor Victim Overrides Minor Medical Omissions and Investigative Lapses in POCSO Cases

On November 20, 2013, the appellant allegedly committed aggravated sexual assault on a minor girl (PW6), aged 11 years, by catching hold of her and pressing her breast with sexual intent

The victim had gone to the appellant's room to fetch her friend

The mother of the victim (PW1) lodged the First Information Statement (FIS) on the same day

Medical examination of the victim (PW6) was conducted by PW10

The Trial Court convicted the appellant under Section 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, sentencing him to five years of rigorous imprisonment

The appellant challenged this conviction on grounds of material inconsistencies between the FIS, the 164 statement, and medical evidence

1. Whether there is any infirmity in the conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court warranting interference by the High Court

2. Whether the non-disclosure of the specific overt act to the medical officer (PW10) or the alleged impossibility of the mother’s presence at two locations within ten minutes vitiates the prosecution's case

The court primarily applied Section 7 of the POCSO Act (definition of sexual assault), Section 9(m) (aggravated sexual assault on a child below 12 years), and Section 10 (punishment for aggravated sexual assault)

It relied on Pattipati Venkaiah v. State of A.P. and Bhargavan v. State of Kerala to establish that a doctor's primary concern is treatment, not investigating the identity of the assailant

principle from Ganesan v. State that the sole testimony of a victim is sufficient if it is trustworthy

State of U.P. v. Hari Mohan regarding the principle that defective investigation does not automatically lead to acquittal if other evidence is strong

The Court found the testimony of the minor victim (PW6) to be consistent and reliable, noting that she stood by her Section 164 statement during trial

The Court dismissed the defense's argument regarding the MLC's lack of detail, reasoning that a medical officer is not legally bound to record the specific name of an assailant or exhaustive details of the assault, as the primary duty is medical

Regarding the timing discrepancy between the medical examination and the arrest memo, the Court held that even if the timing suggested a flaw in the documentation, a defective investigation cannot supersede the credible testimony of a victim

The Court clarified that the slight difference in terminology (“touching” vs “pressing”) between the mother’s FIS and the victim’s testimony was immaterial to the definition of sexual assault under Section 7

The Court held that the ingredients of Section 9(m) of the POCSO Act were fully satisfied as the victim was under 12 and the act involved sexual intent

The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence of five years' rigorous imprisonment were upheld