Read Time: 09 minutes

Noting that as of today the accused was aged 70-­75 years of age and was also reportedly suffering from Tuberculosis (TB), the top court while considering such mitigating circumstances held that the life sentence awarded to one Nawabuddin convicted under Sections 376(2)(i) of IPC and Section 5/6 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 could be converted to fifteen years RI.

While holding so a bench of Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna upheld the monetary fine of Rs.50,000/- imposed by the Trial Court and confirmed by the High Court would be maintained.

Nawabuddin, who was a neighbour of the victim girl, enticed and took the victim girl in the bushes to rape her. However, at that time he was spotted by some persons naked in the process of raping the victim girl and was caught by them red handed and handed over to the police.

Prosecution witness Dr. Vandana Sundriyal confirmed before the trial court that Nawabuddin had penetrated his finger in the vagina, due to which the victim girl felt pain and irritation in urination and he was about to force himself upon her and commit the offence of rape when he was caught red handed.

The accused' submission that at the most it can be said to be an attempt to commit penetrative sexual assault and therefore at the most it can be said to be the case of sexual assault under Section 7 of the POCSO Act punishable under Section 8, was not allowed by the bench.

"... the case would fall under Section 3(b) of the POCSO Act and it can be said to be penetrative sexual assault and considering Section 5(m) of the POCSO Act as such penetrative sexual assault was committed on a girl child aged four years (below twelve years) the same can be said to be ‘aggravated penetrative sexual assault’ punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act....", held the Court.

While dealing with the prayer of taking a lenient view, the bench noted,

"By awarding a suitable punishment commensurate with the act of sexual assault, sexual harassment, a message must be conveyed to the society at large that, if anybody commits any offence under the POCSO Act of sexual assault, sexual harassment, or use of children for pornographic purposes they shall be punished suitably and no leniency shall be shown to them."

The Court further held that children were precious human resources of our country; and its future. It added that the hope of tomorrow rests on them, but unfortunately, in our country, a girl child is in a very vulnerable position, and there are different modes there are different modes of her exploitation, including sexual assault and/or sexual abuse.  

"In the present case it is to be noted that the accused was aged approximately 65 years of age at the time of commission of offence. He was a neighbour of the victim girl. He took advantage of the absence of  her parents, when her mother went to fetch water and her father had gone to work. He is found to have committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault (as observed hereinabove) on a girl child aged four years, which demonstrates the mental state or mindset of the accused. As a neighbour, in fact, it was the duty of the accused to protect the victim girl when alone rather than exploiting her innocence and vulnerability. The victim was barely a four years girl. The 19 accused – appellant was the neighbour. The accused instead of showing fatherly love, affection and protection to the child against the evils of the society, rather made her the victim of lust. It is a case where trust has been betrayed and social values are impaired....", the Court held.

However, noting that the punishment provided for the offence under Section 6, as it stood prior to its amendment and at the time of commission of the offence in the instant case for aggravated penetrative sexual assault was rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years but which may extend to imprisonment for life, the Court went on to find a middle path and reduce the sentence.

Cause Title: Nawabuddin v State of Uttarakhand