Shillong (Meghalaya), May 21: A secret buried by threats unraveled with a missed period. A home pregnancy test set a POCSO case in motion. And on May 20, the Meghalaya High Court slammed shut the appellant’s bid for freedom, confirming a 20-year jail term for sexually assaulting his 15-year-old relative.
Chief Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice W. Diengdoh dismissed Crl.A. No. 15/2024, upholding the December 4, 2023 verdict of the Special Judge (POCSO), East Khasi Hills, in Special (POCSO) Case No. 8 of 2022. The judgment was reserved on May 12.
The trial court had sentenced the man to 20 years rigorous imprisonment and a ₹10,000 fine under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, with six months simple imprisonment in default, along with three years simple imprisonment and a ₹5,000 fine under Section 8. Both terms run concurrently.
The case surfaced on November 2, 2021, when the survivor’s mother approached Mawlai Police Station with an FIR. Her daughter, then a Class IX student, had not had her menstrual cycle for two months. When questioned, the girl disclosed that she was assaulted on June 14, 2021 near their home during her eldest sister’s birthday celebrations. The appellant, a relative from her father’s clan who lived in the same village, had been invited to help with the event. The 15-year-old told the court she refused his advances and reminded him she was a minor, but he assaulted her and warned her not to tell anyone. She returned home in tears.
A pregnancy test kit bought by the mother confirmed the pregnancy. At the hospital, the survivor narrated the incident to the examining doctor. The medical examination found the girl was 4 to 5 months pregnant and the clinical findings corroborated sexual assault. The doctor’s evidence remained unshaken in cross-examination. The survivor’s birth certificate, produced in court, confirmed she was born on March 23, 2006 and was 15 at the time. Her age was never disputed.
The survivor testified that financial hardship forced her to drop out of school after the incident. She delivered a male child on August 8, 2022. She told the court she wants to resume her education and has not received any compensation. She denied in cross-examination that she would have consented even if she were a major, and said an earlier proposal from the appellant’s side had been broken off before the incident. She identified her statement recorded before a Magistrate.
After the pregnancy was confirmed, the appellant came to the mother’s house with his father and brother-in-law. He admitted the unborn child was his but said he could not take responsibility because he already had a wife and had been in another relationship for 18 months. The mother denied that he ever agreed to care for her daughter and child. She told the court he had threatened the survivor not to disclose the incident to her parents. She explained the delay in lodging the FIR was because the appellant was a close relative from her father’s clan.
The trial judge held that the survivor’s testimony, supported by her mother and the medical officer, proved the appellant sexually assaulted a minor. In his statement before the court, the appellant denied the offence but claimed it was a consensual “love relationship” and said he was ready to care for the survivor and child. He did not examine any defence witnesses.
Before the High Court, Senior Advocate H.L. Shangreiso argued that it was a consensual relationship and no POCSO offences were made out. Additional Public Prosecutor R. Gurung with Government Advocate S. Bhattacharjee appeared for the State. The High Court found the survivor’s evidence consistent, her age unchallenged, and the assault medically corroborated. Finding no merit in the appeal, the bench upheld the conviction and 20-year sentence.
