Facts
The child survivor, a 6 year old girl, ran into the accused while she was returning home from her grandmother’s house. He took her to his room, digitally raped her, licked her vagina and pressed her breasts. The child survivor informed her mother about the abuse and an FIR was registered. The accused was convicted by the trial court under section 376 IPC and section 6 POCSO. The accused appealed his conviction on the grounds that there were contradictions in the statement of the mother and the child and that the MLC was not in consonance with the statement of the victim as there was no injury/swelling despite digital penetration.
Judgment
The Court observed that convictions could be sustained on the uncorroborated testimony of the child survivor if the same is cogent and reliable. The Court also cautioned to check for tutoring in cases of child testimony. The Court observed that interchanging on words due to different language used by the mother and daughter would not materially change the deposition of the child survivor. In the present case, the mother had stated that penetration was by finger and the child had stated that it was by hand. Further, absence of injuries/torn hymen would not be fatal to the case of the prosecution. The Court opined that the child survivor had been consistent with her statement and upheld the conviction of the accused person.