Shameful That Every Other Case Is That Of A Minor Being Raped: Kerala High Court Expresses Shock Over Rising POCSO Cases
Appalled by the rising instances of minors being subjected to rape in the State, the Kerala High Court while hearing a criminal appeal remarked: "It is a shame that every other case we consider is sadly a rape of a minor." A Division Bench of Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Ziyad Rahman A. A while upholding the conviction of a man accused of raping a minor girl living in his...
Appalled by the rising instances of minors being subjected to rape in the State, the Kerala High Court while hearing a criminal appeal remarked:
"It is a shame that every other case we consider is sadly a rape of a minor."
A Division Bench of Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Ziyad Rahman A. A while upholding the conviction of a man accused of raping a minor girl living in his neighbourhood, found that there was no inconsistency in the evidence produced by the prosecution.
The case of the prosecution was that the 14-year-old victim was pounced upon by her neighbour when she was alone in her house and forcefully molested.
It was alleged that she was dragged inside the house and thrown on a cot and forcibly penetrated. There was a highly graphic description of the incident when it was narrated by the victim in the chief examination before the trial court.
The prosecutrix alleged that when her mother came home, the accused fled the scene. She claimed to have been told by the accused not to divulge the incident to anybody. However, she disclosed it to her mother and on the next day, FIS was registered.
Subsequently, the Sessions Court convicted the accused for commission of offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(i) (Rape) and 450 (House-trespass) of the IPC read with Sections 5(i) (aggravated penetrative sexual assault) of the POCSO Act.
In appeal, the accused contended that the defence was conducted shabbily and that he was not provided proper legal aid.
Pointing out several aspects where the prosecution was lacking, the perpetrator sought mitigation in the sentence even if the conviction was affirmed.
Nevertheless, the prosecution established that the victim was a minor by producing her birth certificate and convinced the Court that the trial court was abundantly careful in recording the chief examination.
The High Court was inclined to uphold the conviction of the accused:
"We find no reason to interfere with the conviction entered under Sec.376(2)(i) of IPC and Sec.450 of IPC. There is ample evidence to find rape having been committed on the victim, who has also been proved to be below the age of 16 years."
However, it was found that no grievous hurt, bodily harm or injury was found on the body of the child or to the sexual organs.
Therefore, the Court agreed that there was no aggravated penetrative sexual assault in the matter.
Be that as it may, the accused was found to have committed penetrative sexual assault under Section 3, a lesser offence, for which the punishment varies from 10 years to imprisonment for life.
Accordingly, the Bench set aside the conviction under Sec.5(i) read with Sec.6 of the POCSO Act, thereby allowing the appeal partly.
Legal Aid Counsel Advocate Rishikesh Shenoy, Advocate P Mohamed Sabah and Advocate Saipooja appeared for the petitioners and Public Prosecutor Bindu O.V represented the State in the matter.
Case Title: Mani Balan v. State of Kerala