GANESAN versus STATE REPRESENTED BY ITS INSPECTOR OF POLICE

Citation: [2020] 8 S.C.R. 768 · Decided: 14-10-2020 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ASHOK BHUSHAN · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 4 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
768
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 8 S.C.R.
GANESAN
v.
STATE REPRESENTED BY ITS INSPECTOR OF POLICE
(Criminal Appeal No. 680 of 2020)
OCTOBER 14, 2020
[ASHOK BHUSHAN, R. SUBHASH REDDY
AND M. R. SHAH, JJ.]
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 –
ss. 7 and 8 – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Rules,
2012 – r.7(2) – Appellant- accused was tried for the offences
punishable u/s. 7 r/w. s. 8 of the POCSO Act – Relying upon the
deposition of PW-3 victim, aged 13 years the accused was
convicted for the offence u/s. 7 of the POCSO Act and sentenced
to undergo 3 years rigorous imprisonment u/s. 8 of the Act – The
accused was also ordered to pay rupees one lakh to the victim girl,
by way of compensation u/r. 7(2) of the Rules, 2012 – Before the
High Court, it was noted that there was no representation on behalf
of the appellant, therefore, a legal aid counsel was appointed –
The legal aid counsel pleaded the inability of the accused person
to pay the order of compensation and requested to set aside the
order of compensation – The High Court modified the judgment
and order passed by the trial Court with respect to compensation
to the effect that compensation amount shall be paid by the State
to the victim girl and thereafter if the State finds that the accused
has got sufficient means, the same can be recovered from the
accused under the Revenue Recovery Act – Before the Supreme
Court, the appellant-accused contended that the trial Court has
committed a grave error in convicting the accused, relying upon
the sole testimony of PW-3-victim – It was also emphasised that the
appeal was disposed of within the four days from the date of
providing legal assistance to the accused and it was very short time
for the legal aid counsel to receive the papers from the Registry
and inspect original documents – Held: It is required to be noted
that there is nothing on record that the legal aid counsel was not
having any papers – On persual of the entire judgment of the trial
Court, the PW-3-victim has fully supported the case of the
prosecution – She has narrated in detail how the incident had taken
  [2020] 8 S.C.R. 768
768
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
769
place and she has been thoroughly cross-examined – Her testimony
is reliable and trustworthy – The sole testimony of the PW-3 is
unblemished and evidence is of sterling quality – The trial Court
has not committed any error in convicting the accused, relying upon
the sole deposition of PW-3-victim – The High Court has rightly
convicted the accused for offence u/s. 7 of the POCSO Act and
rightly sentenced u/s.8 of the POCSO Act.
Dismissing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. In the present case, the appellant-accused has
been convicted by the trial Court for the offence under Section
7, punishable under Section 8 of the POCSO Act. This Court
has gone through the entire judgment passed by the trial Court
as well as the relevant evidence on record, more particularly the
deposition of PW1-father of the victim, PW2-mother of the victim
and PW3- victim herself. It is true that PW2-mother of the victim
has turned hostile. However, PW3-victim has fully supported the
case of the prosecution. She has narrated in detail how the
incident has taken place. She has been thoroughly and fully cross-
examined. This Court does not see any good reason not to rely
upon the deposition of PW3 – victim. PW3 aged 15 years at the
time of deposition is a matured one. She is trustworthy and
reliable. As per the settled proposition of law, even there can
be a conviction based on the sole testimony of the victim,
however, she must be found to be reliable and trustworthy. [Para
9][774-F-H]
2. On evaluating the deposition of PW3 – victim on the
touchstone of the law laid down by this Court in the aforesaid
decisions, this Court is of the opinion that the sole testimony of
the PW3 – victim is absolutely trustworthy and unblemished and
her evidence is of sterling quality. [Para 9.3][780-C]
3. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case,
the trial Court has not committed any error in convicting the
accused, relying upon the deposition of PW3 – victim. The trial
Court has imposed the minimum sentence provided under
Section 8 of the POCSO Act. Therefore, the trial Court has
already shown the leniency. At this stage, it is required to be
noted that allegations against the accused which are proved from
GANESAN v. STATE REPRESENTED BY ITS
INSPECTOR OF POLICE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
770
SUPREME COURT REPORTS

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.