The Meghalaya High Court allowed an appeal filed by Emanuel Marwein and set aside his conviction and sentence in a POCSO case, observing that the prosecution had failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that he was the person who committed the alleged offence.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice W. Diengdoh quashed the October 2022 judgment of the Special Judge (POCSO), West Khasi Hills District, Nongstoin. The trial court had convicted Marwein under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The trial court had sentenced him to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment and imposed a fine of ₹25,000 under the POCSO Act, along with two years of rigorous imprisonment under the IPC.
After examining the evidence, the High Court found discrepancies concerning the identification of the accused. The Bench noted differences between the statement made by the survivor in court and the history recorded by the doctor during her medical examination.
Although the survivor identified the appellant in court, the doctor had recorded that she knew the alleged assailant only as “Mama”. The doctor also stated that the name “Phring Monday Marwein” had been provided by relatives accompanying the survivor and that this was not the name of the appellant.
The court further noted that the letter allegedly written by the survivor and relied upon for registration of the FIR did not mention the accused’s name. The Bench also pointed out a discrepancy in the dates: the letter was dated June 28, 2017, whereas the FIR had been registered on June 8, 2017.
Considering these discrepancies, the High Court held that the prosecution had not proved beyond reasonable doubt that Marwein, and Marwein alone, had committed the alleged sexual assault.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the appeal and quashed and set aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the Special Judge (POCSO), West Khasi Hills District, Nongstoin, in Special (POCSO) Case No. 25 of 2018.
The court directed that Marwein be released immediately if he was not required in connection with any other case. It also ordered that any fine deposited by him be refunded.
