Presumption Of Guilt Under POCSO Act Not Automatic, Prosecution Must Prove Offence Through Reliable Evidence: Delhi High Court Reiterates
The Delhi High Court has reiterated that the statutory presumption of guilt under Section 29 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act does not arise automatically merely because an accused is facing trial under the enactment.
Section 29 of the POCSO Act mandates that when a person is prosecuted for committing, abetting, or attempting specific serious sexual offences, the Special Court must presume the accused is guilty until proven otherwise.
Justice Madhu Jain said that the prosecution must first establish the ingredients constituting the alleged offence through cogent and reliable evidence before such a burden is shifted to the accused.
The Court made the observations while allowing an appeal filed by a man convicted by the trial court for the offences under Sections 366, 376(2)(n) and 506(II) of the IPC and Section 5(l) punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
It was the prosecution's case that the prosecutrix, aged about 17 years, went missing from her home in August 2023 and was later recovered with the appellant from Ambala.
Initially, in her statement to the police, she stated that she had voluntarily accompanied the appellant, that they were in a relationship, had married in a temple and had established physical relations with her consent.
However, in her subsequent statement before the magistrate as well as during the trial, she alleged that the appellant had threatened her with a knife, forcibly took her away and sexually assaulted her.
The appellant submitted that the prosecutrix had given materially different versions at different stages of the proceedings and that the trial court failed to appreciate these contradictions.
It was also contended that there were significant investigative lapses, including failure to identify the place of occurrence, prepare a site plan, examine independent witnesses or produce call detail records.
The State, on the other hand, contended that the prosecutrix was a minor and therefore her consent was wholly immaterial.
Allowing the appeal, the Court said that the victim's deposition before the Trial Court contained further improvements regarding the manner in which she accompanied the appellant and the nature of the alleged sexual acts.
It added that the said variations were not confined to peripheral matters but concerned the genesis of the prosecution case itself.
Justice Jain observed that the Trial Court proceeded on the assumption that the statutory presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act became operative merely because the appellant was facing trial for an offence under Section 6 of the enactment.
“Such an approach, in the opinion of this Court, is legally unsustainable. The minority of the prosecutrix renders her consent legally irrelevant; however, it does not relieve the prosecution of its obligation to establish the essential ingredients of the offences charged through reliable and cogent evidence,” the judge said.
Noting that several investigative lapses remained unexplained, the Court said that though every lapse in investigation may not necessarily enure to the benefit of the accused, such deficiencies assume significance where the testimony of the star witness itself suffers from material inconsistencies.
“The learned Trial Court has failed to adequately appreciate these material improvements while recording the conviction. In the absence of reliable and consistent evidence establishing the foundational facts beyond reasonable doubt, it would be unsafe to sustain the conviction. Consequently, the appellant is entitled to the benefit of doubt,” the Court said.
It accordingly acquitted the man and ordered that he be released forthwith, if not required in any other case.
Title: VIKASH v. THE STATE GOVT OF NCT DELHI & ANR