Shayaka Parveen vs The State Of Bihar

Headnote AI-drafted · Reviewed and approved

The appellant/informant (victim no.1), a minor girl, filed an appeal under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 challenging the judgment and order of acquittal dated 15.01.2024 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge VI-cum-Special Judge, POCSO Act, Samastipur, whereby the private respondent/accused was acquitted of charges under Sections 342 and 376D of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act in connection with an alleged gang rape of two minor sisters on 14.07.2022.

The Trial Court had acquitted the accused primarily on the grounds that there were variations in the date of occurrence, contradictions in the testimony of both victims rendering their evidence untrustworthy, non-compliance of Section 53A Cr.P.C. regarding medical examination of the accused, failure to recover the alleged video of the incident, and failure of the prosecution to prove the foundational facts establishing guilt. The appellant argued that the prosecution had duly proved its case, that the presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act operated against the accused, and that minor contradictions should not have been used to discredit the victims' testimony in a case of gang rape of minors.

The Patna High Court, having heard the parties and perused the record, examined the evidence on record including the depositions of the two victim witnesses, the mother (PW-1), doctors (PWs-5 and 6), the Investigating Officer (PW-7), and other formal witnesses, to determine whether the impugned order of acquittal called for interference.

Catchwords: gang rape · minor victims · POCSO Act · acquittal appeal · Section 372 CrPC · victim testimony · contradictions in evidence · Section 29 POCSO presumption · wrongful confinement · special court · Patna High Court