‘No mother would gamble with her child’s dignity’: Calcutta High Court rejects convict’s revenge theory in POCSO case

Findings

• The evidence on record clearly indicates the offence under Section 376(2) (commits rape, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than ten years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and Section 6 (punishment for aggravated penetrative sexual assault) of the POCSO Act, 2012 has been established beyond a reasonable doubt.
• The mother of the survivor was not related to the petitioner. She thus had no concern whatsoever with the life or affairs of the said person.
• The defense of the petitioner that the survivor’s mother has framed him in the said offence to take revenge against his alcoholism is unbelievable.
• Further, no mother would gamble with the dignity and childhood of her minor daughter to take revenge against an innocent person. This would harm her own child.
• The petitioner, if left for a longer time with the survivor, would have committed a more heinous offence on her.
• The conviction of the petitioner does not call for any interference by this court.

Background

• The incident occurred in 2013, when the petitioner took the three-year-old victim into his house while she was playing outside her home.
• The survivor’s mother, alerted by her daughter’s cries, entered the petitioner’s home to find that the petitioner was assaulting her child.
• According to the prosecution, upon witnessing the horrific scene, the hue and cry rose, then the neighbours assembled, and the survivor was immediately taken out and was placed on her mother’s lap.
• Following this, the police arrested the petitioner, and a detailed investigation was conducted.
• The statement of the mother of the survivor and the neighbors was recorded before the magistrate and were proved in the course of the trial.
• The petitioner, in his statement, alleged that the survivor’s mother had threatened him to teach him a lesson for his regular alcoholism.
• Based on the evidence on record, the trial judge convicted the petitioner in 2015 under Section 376(2) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012.
• The petitioner was sentenced to life imprisonment and directed to pay a fine of Rs 10,000.
• The petitioner filed a plea the present plea against the trial court order.
• A report from the superintendent of the correctional home submitted that the petitioner has already undergone 12 years, 4 months, and 19 days of imprisonment, and has earned nearly two years of remission.