The appellant was to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay fine of Rs.50,000/ under Section 9/10 of POCSO Act, 2012 and under Section 341 of IPC he was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month.
Statement of PW.1, Child Anjali Rai was recorded.
The FIR No.05 02 14 under Section 376/511 of IPC was registered on the same day against the accusedappellant and the matter was taken up for investigation by the OfficerinCharge of the PS i.e., SubInspector SI .
The appellant aggrieved by the judgment of the Special Judge filed an appeal which though has been dismissed by the High Court but while dismissing the appeal sentence under Section 9/10 of POCSO Act, 2012 has been companyverted into sentence under Section 5 m of the POCSO Act read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act and sentence has been enhanced from seven years to ten years with fine of Rs.5,000/. As per the prosecution case, on 20.02.2014 at 1700 hours, Mangal Das Rai, PW.2 father of Anjali Rai resident of Lower Namphing, South Sikkim gave a written companyplaint to Temi Police Station that the accused appellant, Kumar Ghimirey had attempted to sexually assault his seven year old daughter, Anjali Rai, PW.1, at around 1330 hours in a jungle.
The mother of victim, PW.3 was examined.
The victim was also directed to be paid companypensation of Rs.1,00,000/ Rupees one lakh by the High Court under Sikkim Compensation to Victim Scheme.
PW.9, Gynecologist, who examined the victim has also appeared in the witness box.
The appellant aggrieved by the judgment of the High Court has companye up in the appeal.
PW.5 and PW.6 were the girls who before attending the school with the victim were returning at the same time.
The Sentences of imprisonment shall run companycurrently.
In paragraph 25, the Special Judge while recording companyviction held under Section 9/10 of POCSO Act, 2012 imposed simple imprisonment for a period of seven years and fine of Rs.50,000/. Under Section 341 of IPC sentence imposed was simple imprisonment for a period of one month.
Father of the victim appeared as PW.2.
They also appeared in the witness box companyroborating the incident.
ASHOK BHUSHAN, J. Leave granted.
This appeal has been filed by the appellant against the judgment of Sikkim High Court dated 20.09.2016 dismissing Criminal Appeal No.19 of 2015 filed by the appellant questioning the order of companyviction and sentence dated 31.01.2014 passed by the Special Judge POCSO Act, 2012 companyvicting the appellant under Section 9/10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by SANJAY KUMAR Offences Date 2019.04.22 161759 IST Act, 2012 POCSO Act, 2012 , Section 341 of Reason IPC.
