Pranav B Prem

The Telangana High Court recently acquitted a man convicted under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO), ruling that the evidence of a child witness can easily be influenced by family members and may not be reliable if it appears to be the result of tutoring. This landmark judgment asserted the importance of careful scrutiny when evaluating child witness testimony in sensitive cases.

Background

The appellant, Begari Ravi Kumar, had been convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge under Sections 452 and 376 AB of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 5(i)(j)(m) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act. He was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years for the offence under Section 452 of IPC and 20 years for the offence under the POCSO Act, with sentences to run concurrently. The appellant challenged the conviction in the Telangana High Court, asserting that the prosecution's evidence was improbable and untrustworthy.

Prosecution’s Case

The victim’s mother alleged that the appellant entered their house at night when she was outside at a nearby temple. According to the complaint, the appellant sexually assaulted the 10-year-old victim, threatening her to remain silent. Blood stains were reportedly found on the victim's clothes. The appellant allegedly confessed to the crime when confronted by the victim's family but fled afterward.

Key Contentions

The appellant’s counsel, Ms. P. Krishna Keerthana, argued that it was implausible for the appellant to have committed the offence unnoticed by five family members sleeping in the same room. She also pointed out discrepancies in the forensic evidence, such as the absence of blood stains on the frock as per the FSL report and the lack of a DNA analysis to corroborate the allegations. The prosecution contended that there was no reason for the victim or her family to fabricate the allegations. The Assistant Public Prosecutor emphasized that a child of tender age could not concoct such serious accusations without basis.

Observations by the Court

Justice K. Surender, hearing the appeal, noted several inconsistencies and gaps in the prosecution's case:

1. The Court observed that the evidence of the child witness, the victim, appeared to have been influenced by the elders in her family. The Court stated, “The evidence of a child witness can easily be influenced by the elders in the family. Acceptance of the child witness evidence would be dangerous in the present circumstances of the case as the evidence appears to be a result of tutoring.”

2. The prosecution failed to examine key witnesses, including the victim's father and grandfather, who were reportedly sleeping beside the victim during the alleged incident.

3. Although the doctor testified to finding blood stains on the victim’s clothes, the FSL report did not confirm this. Additionally, no DNA analysis was conducted to link the appellant to the crime.

4. The Court found it unlikely that the appellant could have committed the offence in a small room with five other people present without being noticed.

5. The judgment highlighted the existence of a family property dispute between the appellant and the victim's family, raising the possibility of a false implication.

Legal Precedents Cited

The Court referred to several judgments to underline the need for caution while relying on child witness testimony:

• State of U.P. v. Krishna Master (2010): Emphasized that child witnesses can be credible if their testimony is free from embellishments and inspires confidence.
• Panchhi v. State of U.P. (1998): Stressed that while the evidence of a child witness must be evaluated with greater care, it should not be rejected outright if found reliable.

Verdict

The High Court concluded that the prosecution had failed to establish the guilt of the appellant beyond a reasonable doubt. It stated that the prosecution's version appeared to be fabricated and motivated by a family dispute over property. Allowing the criminal appeal, the Court set aside the conviction and acquitted the appellant.

Cause Title: Begari Ravi Kumarv State of Telangana

Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 88 OF 2024

Date: December-27-2024

Bench: Justice K. Surender

[Read/Download order]