Northeast

POCSO Case: Manipur HC dismisses prayer for medically ascertaining age of victim

Chief justice Sanjay Kumar of the High Court of Manipur while dismissing the prayer also vacated the stay order of trial of the Special Judge (POCSO), Imphal East that granted to stay further proceedings by the HC in 2019.

ByIFP Bureau

Updated 12 Apr 2022, 4:55 pm

High Court of Manipur
High Court of Manipur


A single bench of the High Court of Manipur on Tuesday dismissed a prayer made by the accused in a POCSO case to medically ascertain the age of the victim.

Advertisement

Chief justice Sanjay Kumar of the High Court of Manipur while dismissing the prayer also vacated the stay order of trial of the Special Judge (POCSO), Imphal East that granted to stay further proceedings by the HC in 2019.

The accused Yumnam Swamy Singh, about 29 years, son of Y Boy Singh, a resident of Kongpal Khaidem Leikai was framed charges by the Special Judge under Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO), 2012 in connection with FIR No.14(9)2014 WPS-IE, registered under Sections 366, 366-A and 376 IPC along with Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

The accused allegedly committed criminal acts upon a complainant’s minor daughter in 2014.

Advertisement

The accused claimed that the charge was framed against him by the Special Judge only in relation to the offence alleged under Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. After the examination of eight witnesses during the trial, the case was fixed for final arguments.

The accused moved the subject application under Section 7A of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, (for brevity, ‘the Act of 2000’) and Rule 12(3) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007, (for brevity, ‘the Rules of 2007’) to medically ascertain the age of the victim girl.The court after examining the materials on record stated that in any event, even if the date of birth of the victim is 1997 is accepted instead of 1998, she would still be a minor at the time of the incident in September, 2014. The court therefore stated that it fails to see how the document would benefit the accused.

Having considered the school records available, which consistently showed her date of birth to be September 23, 1998, the Special Judge also undertook an inquiry and examined witnesses, including the headmaster and the headmistress of the schools where the victim had studied.

The HC mentioned that there was no error committed by the Special Judge in rejecting the request to direct determination of the age of the victim girl through medical examination. 

Advertisement

First published:12 Apr 2022, 4:55 pm

Tags:

Sexual OffencesPOCSO caseminor victim

IFP Bureau

IFP Bureau

IMPHAL, Manipur

Advertisement

Top Stories

Loading data...
Advertisement

IFP Exclusive

Loading data...
Advertisement

Feedback

Have a complaint, a suggestion or just some feedback about our content? Please write to onlineifp@gmail.com and we’ll do our best to address it.