Facts
A child survivor who was less than 8 years old was sexually assaulted by her neighbour. A FIR was filed by the mother of the child. The Trial Court observed that the child’s tender age warranted careful consideration of her testimony and any contradictions that arose during cross-examination and the accused was convicted under Section 354 IPC and Section 10 POCSO Act. An appeal was filed against the conviction with one of the grounds being that the child’s testimony was fraught with contradictions.
Judgment
The Court found despite the child only being 10 years of age at the time of her testimony, had testified consistently as to the incident of abuse and had also identified the accused during the trial. The court found the testimony of the child survivor to be consistent, truthful, and reliable, affirming her status as a competent witness. Her account was further supported in part by her mother’s testimony. The court also held that the accused had failed to rebut the presumption under Section 29 POCSO Act despite foundational facts having been proved by the prosecution. Consequently, the Court upheld the conviction based on the reliable evidence presented, affirming that the statutory presumption of guilt remained unchallenged by the appellant throughout the proceedings.