Calcutta HC Acquits Man in Pocso Case, Cites Inconsistent Testimony
Calcutta HC Overturns Pocso Conviction, Acquits Accused

Calcutta High Court Overturns Pocso Conviction

In a significant ruling, the Calcutta High Court has set aside a Bankura trial court order that had sentenced an accused to three years of imprisonment under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act. The High Court bench, led by Justice Tirthankar Ghosh, delivered the acquittal order on Monday, freeing the accused of all charges.

Foundation of Prosecution Case Deemed Insufficient

Justice Ghosh, in his detailed order, stated that the prosecution had failed to establish the foundational facts required to attract the provisions of Section 29 and 30 of the Pocso Act. He specifically pointed out that the testimony provided by the victim girl and her relations did not present a consistent narrative of events.

"I am of the opinion that the prosecution has failed to lay down the foundational facts for attracting provisions of Section 29 and 30 of the Pocso Act. The testimony of the victim girl or her relations do not lay down a consistent state of facts," Justice Ghosh observed in his ruling.

Material Inconsistencies in Witness Statements

The judgment highlighted "material inconsistencies" and "contradictions" between the versions presented by witnesses during court proceedings and their initial statements recorded by the police at the time of the First Information Report (FIR). These discrepancies formed a crucial basis for the acquittal.

The legal counsel representing the accused had challenged the trial court's decision by moving the High Court on July 27, 2022. The case originated from allegations of abuse against a minor girl while she was traveling to a private tuition class in the Bishnupur area of Bankura district.

The High Court's decision underscores the importance of consistent and reliable evidence in Pocso cases, particularly when dealing with serious charges that carry substantial prison sentences. This ruling demonstrates the judiciary's careful scrutiny of witness testimony and procedural adherence in sensitive cases involving minor victims.