Calcutta High Court Rejects Convict's Revenge Theory in POCSO Case, Upholds Life Sentence
The Calcutta High Court has firmly rejected a convict's defense that he was framed in a Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) case due to his alcoholism, upholding his life imprisonment sentence. The court emphasized that no mother would gamble with her child's dignity and childhood to take revenge against an innocent person.
Court's Stern Observation on the Defense
A division bench comprising Justices Rajasekhar Mantha and Ajay Kumar Gupta was hearing a plea from a man convicted in a POCSO case involving the sexual assault of a three-year-old girl. The bench noted that the petitioner cannot be treated as a normal human being for perpetrating such an offense on a toddler.
The court observed, "The petitioner cannot be treated as a normal human being for being perpetrated offence of this nature on a three-year-old girl." On the petitioner's defense that the survivor's mother framed him to take revenge against his alcoholism, the court stated that no mother would gamble with the dignity and childhood of her minor daughter for such a purpose, as it would harm her own child.
Key Findings and Evidence
The evidence on record clearly established the offense under Section 376(2) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which deals with rape and carries a punishment of rigorous imprisonment for at least ten years up to life, and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012, which prescribes punishment for aggravated penetrative sexual assault. The court found this beyond a reasonable doubt.
It was noted that the mother of the survivor was not related to the petitioner and had no concern with his life or affairs. The defense that she framed him due to his alcoholism was deemed unbelievable. The court further highlighted that if left with the survivor for longer, the petitioner might have committed a more heinous offense.
The conviction was upheld without interference, with the court stating that the petitioner's actions warranted the life sentence imposed.
Background of the Case
The incident dates back to 2013 when the petitioner took the three-year-old victim into his house while she was playing outside her home. Alerted by her daughter's cries, the survivor's mother entered the petitioner's home and found him assaulting her child.
According to the prosecution, neighbors assembled upon hearing the commotion, and the survivor was immediately rescued and placed on her mother's lap. The police arrested the petitioner, and a detailed investigation followed, with statements from the mother and neighbors recorded before a magistrate and proved during the trial.
In his statement, the petitioner alleged that the survivor's mother had threatened to teach him a lesson for his regular alcoholism. Based on the evidence, the trial judge convicted him in 2015 under Section 376(2) of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, sentencing him to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs 10,000.
The petitioner filed the present plea against the trial court order. A report from the superintendent of the correctional home indicated that he has already undergone over 12 years of imprisonment and earned nearly two years of remission.
Implications and Legal Context
This ruling reinforces the judiciary's commitment to protecting children under the POCSO Act and sends a strong message against attempts to deflect blame in such serious cases. The court's dismissal of the revenge theory underscores the importance of evidence-based judgments and the protection of victims' rights.
The case highlights the severe penalties for sexual offenses against minors in India, with life imprisonment being a common outcome in aggravated cases. It also reflects the ongoing efforts to ensure justice for survivors and hold perpetrators accountable, regardless of their defenses.
