A Special Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) court in Vadodara has sentenced a 24-year-old man to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment for raping his minor niece in a village near Vadodara city in 2022, despite the victim and her parents turning hostile during the trial.
The court described the victim as a “tutored witness” due to her familial connection with the accused and based its judgment on medical evidence and the “demeanor” of the accused. According to the 56-page order delivered by Special POCSO Judge Priyanka Agarwal, even though the victim and her parents became hostile, the court could not merely be a “spectator.” Therefore, it relied on the medical and corroborative evidence, which were “against the accused.”
The POCSO court awarded the victim Rs 6 lakh in compensation, stating, “It is settled law that corroborated part of evidence of a hostile witness regarding commission of offence is admissible… Merely because a witness deviates from the statement made in the FIR, the evidence cannot be held to be totally unreliable… If a witness becomes hostile to subvert the judicial process, the court shall not stand as a mute spectator and every effort should be made to bring home the truth. Criminal justice system cannot be overturned by gullible witnesses who act under pressure, inducement or intimidation…”
Considering the medical evidence presented during the trial, the court remarked, “The victim can be termed a tutored witness as she is following what she has been taught by her family. The victim and the accused are related to each other and, therefore, the victim’s statement is (distorted), but the victim has (previously) recorded a statement under CrPC 164 and stated the facts. Moreover, medical evidence as well as the demeanor are also against the accused.”
The court highlighted the accused’s “revealing” demeanor during the trial, particularly when asked why the victim “feared his presence, and requested to turn off the screen when it displayed his picture.” The accused responded indifferently with, “This is not true.” The court noted, “The conduct of the accused can be gauged from the fact that the victim has come to the court, escorted by the lawyer of the accused, and accompanied by her mother and grandmother, who is the mother of the accused. It proves that the accused has ‘won over’ the prosecution witness…”
In April 2022, the prosecution stated that the accused lured the victim with chocolates to a deserted area while she was collecting wildflowers with her friends. The friends returned home and informed the victim’s mother about the incident.
The court examined 16 witnesses, including five children related to the victim and the accused, and reviewed 42 pieces of documentary and circumstantial evidence.
