Child's 'Thank You' to Driver Doesn't Disprove Sexual Assault: Sikkim High Court
The Sikkim High Court has upheld the conviction of a taxi driver for aggravated sexual assault under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, rejecting the defence argument that a 13-year-old girl's polite 'thank you' to the driver after the ride indicated no assault occurred. The court emphasised that a child's reaction to such trauma varies and cannot be judged by adult standards.
Justice Bhaskar Raj Pradhan, in a June 23 order, noted that the defence cannot merely create doubt; under Section 29 of the POCSO Act, the accused is presumed guilty unless the contrary is proved. The judge observed: 'How a child of 13 years would react to such an incident may differ from child to child. One child may make a hue and cry about it, and yet another may choose to remain silent, stunned by the incident.'
The incident occurred when the girl was returning home from school after Independence Day practice. The driver allegedly asked her to move to the front seat after dropping other passengers, then touched her shirt buttons and breasts. The girl pushed him away and asked to be taken home quickly. She immediately told her mother, who chased the driver with her daughter. The mother confronted the driver in a traffic jam and took his keys, but he fled after retrieving them. The father later filed a police complaint.
During cross-examination, the girl withstood extensive questioning, and the trial court found her testimony 'sterling' and indisputable. The accused was sentenced to five years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 2,000. The High Court upheld the conviction, noting that the five-year sentence is the minimum prescribed for aggravated sexual assault under the POCSO Act. The court also upheld the Rs 50,000 compensation awarded to the survivor.
Advocate Neha Gupta, representing the accused, argued that the girl's 'thank you' to the driver after alighting suggested no incident occurred. However, the court dismissed this, stating that undue emphasis should not be placed on such a gesture to question the child's veracity. 'There is no reason why a child of 13 years should blame the appellant for an act which he had not committed,' the judge remarked.
Additional Public Prosecutor Yadav Sharma defended the trial court's judgment, arguing that the prosecution had established the case beyond reasonable doubt. The High Court agreed, reaffirming that in POCSO cases, the survivor's testimony is of paramount importance and central to the prosecution's case.
