A Delhi court has sentenced a man to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act and the Indian Penal Code for penetrative sexual assault on a minor boy. The victim, a 14-year-old, filed a complaint nearly 10 months after the 2023 crime when the accused allegedly uploaded an objectionable video of him on Instagram.
Court's Observations on Trauma
While awarding the sentence on May 26, Additional Sessions Judge Vaibhav Mehta noted the 'gravity of the offence' and observed that the child 'might have suffered a lot of emotional and physical trauma.' The court also directed a payment of Rs 8 lakh as compensation to the boy.
Details of the Crime
The boy and the man initially had a neighbourly friendship that turned abusive after the man began pressuring and physically assaulting the child. In November 2023, he sexually assaulted the boy at his residence while allegedly filming the act and threatening to kill his family if he disclosed anything to anyone.
Defence Arguments Rejected
Earlier this month, while convicting the accused, Mohd. Fareed, the court rejected the defence's argument that the boy's delay in reporting had weakened the prosecution's case. The court stated: 'The child victim lodged the complaint when the objectionable video... was posted by the accused on Instagram.'
Testimony of the Victim
The court relied heavily on the testimony of the 14-year-old boy, describing it as of 'sterling quality, especially considering his tender age, and it is sufficient to record the conviction.' It observed that the testimony remained consistent throughout the complaint, the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.PC, and the deposition before the court.
Video Evidence and Identification
Though the face of the accused man was not visible in the video, the court accepted the victim's identification of him as the perpetrator. It also rejected the defence's claim that the file was edited 'post production,' calling the argument 'not tenable.' The court noted that a forensic expert's observations did not establish fabrication of the video.
False Implication Claim Dismissed
The court dismissed the accused's contention that he had been falsely implicated over a monetary dispute of Rs 5,000–10,000.
