Facts
The child survivor aged 9 years old and was sexually assaulted by her maternal uncle. The abuse had been going on for a while and came to light when the child survivor’s mother returned home to find her brother abusing her daughter. Accordingly, an FIR was registered. The accused was convicted by the trial court under Sections 376, 377 and 506 IPC and section 6 POCSO. The accused was appealing his conviction on the ground that there was no evidence against the accused; there is no medical report regarding sexual offence; the trial Court did not assess the evidence properly.
Judgment
The court ruled that the absence of spermatozoa was not significant, as the medical officer found redness and discharge from her private parts, proving the sexual assault. The court emphasised on the need for sensitivity in cases involving sexual abuse. The court noted that that the sole testimony of the survivor is sufficient for a conviction in a case of sexual assault is found to when it is found to be trustworthy, unblemished, credible and her evidence is of sterling quality. It was further emphasised that no corroboration is needed unless there are compelling reasons for seeking corroborations and minor discrepancies in the child survivor’s statement would not discredit the case. The court upheld the conviction of the accused.