Testimony of a Minor Victim Corroborated by Parents and School Records Sufficiently Proves Stalking and Criminal Intimidation

The appellant was convicted by the Special Judge, POCSO Act, Katni, for stalking and harassing a 14-year-old girl

On 10.11.2024, the appellant proposed marriage to the victim and threatened to kill her family members if she refused

The victim informed her parents, leading to the registration of FIR No.927/2024

The appellant challenged the conviction on grounds of lack of independent witnesses, alleged previous enmity, and disputes regarding the victim's age

The appellant sought acquittal or, alternatively, a reduction in sentence

1. Whether the trial court erred in convicting the appellant based on the uncorroborated testimony of the minor victim and her parents

2. Whether the age of the victim was proved in accordance with legal standards under the POCSO Act

3. Whether the quantum of the two-year rigorous imprisonment sentence was appropriate given the nature of the allegations

The court applied Section 415(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 374(2) of the CrPC) regarding appeals against conviction

Substantive charges were under Sections 75(1)(ii) (Stalking) and 78 (Criminal intimidation) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Sections 11(i) and 11(iv) (Sexual Harassment) punishable under Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012

The court also relied on the evidentiary principle that the testimony of a minor victim, if reliable and consistent, does not require independent corroboration to sustain a conviction

The High Court found the victim’s testimony consistent and firm, noting that she stood her ground during cross-examination without material contradictions

It held that the absence of independent witnesses on a public road does not invalidate the reliable testimony of a victim

Regarding the age of the victim, the court relied on the School Scholar Register (Ex.P/4) and the testimony of the Headmaster (PW-4), proving the victim was a "child" (aged 14) under the POCSO Act

The court dismissed the plea of previous enmity as insufficient to discredit the prompt FIR and consistent oral evidence

However, the court observed that since the offense involved verbal harassment/stalking without physical assault, a slight reduction in the sentence would meet the ends of justice

The court answered the issues by holding the evidence of the minor and the school records were sufficient for conviction

While maintaining executive the fine and default stipulations, the court modified the substantive sentence, reducing the rigorous imprisonment from two years to one year and six months

The appeal was disposed of with a direction to release the appellant upon completion of the modified term