HC: Pocso draconian, huge burden on accused

The trial courts should give due consideration to the improbabilities or other material weaknesses found in prosecution’s evidence, failing which justice would not be served, added Justice RN Manjula.

The judge made the observation while setting aside an order of the Fast Track Mahila Court, Dharmapuri, convicting Senthil Kumar, a school teacher accused of sexually assaulting four teenage students in 2016. In the verdict dated October 30, 2018, the Sessions Judge had awarded him five years’ rigorous imprisonment under section 10 of the Act and three months’ rigorous imprisonment under Section 323 of IPC (Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt).

“When offence against children has to be viewed seriously, the court should also be cautious of the fact that the [accused] has got a huge responsibility for proving innocence. Because of the draconian nature of the special Act, the punishment is very grave,” ruled Justice Manjula, allowing the criminal appeal petition that Senthil Kumar had filed. “There are patent contradictions even between the evidence of the complainant and his victim daughter. If these material contradictions and lack of clarity in the evidence is overlooked and not given due weight as rebuttal proof, that might defeat the ends of justice,” the court held.

The judge noted that the first victim did not state anything about the sexual assault in her evidence, while the evidence of other children was bereft of any material particulars like time, place, etc.