In Mumbai, the special POCSO court has sentenced a 45-year-old man for attempting to sexually assault a three-year-old girl in January 2020. The man was found guilty after the girl testified in court and denied being coached by her parents.
According to the prosecution's case, on January 24, 2020, around 6 pm, three children of the informant (victim's mother) were playing outside. The accused, who lived in the same locality, went there and took the victim-informant's elder daughter to his house. After some time, the victim returned home, and the informant took her for a bath. When the girl went to urinate, she started crying in pain.
Victim narrates ordeal
Upon inquiry by the informant, the victim revealed that the accused took her to his house. The girl explained that the accused removed her clothes and sexually assaulted her. The mother immediately went to the accused's house to confront him, but he was not there, and his wife denied the allegations. The daughter clarified that his wife was not at home during the incident. The family registered a case with Dharavi police station on the same day, and the accused was arrested on January 26, 2020.
During the trial, the victim's testimony was recorded, where she identified the accused in court. She mentioned that he took her to a shop, bought her chocolate, and then took her to his house, narrating the incident in detail. The defense argued that there was an inconsistency in her narration before the court compared to her statement.
Defence arguments dismissed
The court dismissed the defence arguments, accepting the victim's testimony, stating, "The victim has specifically stated that the accused gave chocolate to her. Considering the fact that the victim was 5-year-old at the time of recording her evidence, she is not expected to state all the facts connected to the incident, such as the accused taking her to the shop. A girl of 5 years old is expected to depose about the incident of sexual harassment that happened to her."
Furthermore, the accused testified as a defence witness, claiming he had a quarrel with a neighbouring lady who was in jail. He alleged that the neighbor, due to their dispute, instigated the informant to file a false case against him, and the informant demanded Rs 50,000 from his wife.
However, the court noted that the accused couldn't provide the name of the neighboring lady with whom he had quarreled. Additionally, he had no knowledge of who the informant in the present case was. Therefore, the court questioned his allegations and rejected his claim, finding the man guilty of sexually assaulting the minor girl.
