Delhi HC Sentences Man to Life Term for Sodomising Minor

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has sentenced a man to life imprisonment for sodomising a three-and-a half-year-old boy, observing that the child was subjected to traumatic and brutal sexual assault.

A bench of justices S Muralidhar and Vinod Goel dismissed the man's appeal and upheld a trial court's order convicting him for the offences of aggravated penetrative assault under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and kidnapping and wrongful confinement under the IPC.

The bench noted that the child was "too young to depose" in the court and the failure to examine him was not fatal to the prosecution's case.

"The victim was a young three-and-a-half-year-old child and was subjected to traumatic and brutal sexual assault by the convict. In the circumstances, the court does not find any reason whatsoever to interfere with the sentence awarded to him for the offences," it said.

The incident took place on February 11, 2014, when the father of the victim had come home for lunch while the child was playing outside.

When the boy did not return home for some time, he asked his wife to search for him and later lodged a missing complaint at Madhu Vihar Police Station in east Delhi.

While searching for the child, the police reached a nearby photocopy shop and on showing the boy's photograph, they were told that a man had taken him to the building's roof.

Upon opening the room, the police found the child with the accused and on seeing this, an agitated crowd started beating the man. The accused, Vinod Soren was then arrested.

Soren claimed that the boy was brought to his room by some people who assaulted him. The accused also said that he had not committed the crime and had been falsely implicated.

The trial court, which had held him guilty of the offences and also imposed a fine of Rs 41,000, had directed that a compensation of Rs 7.5 lakh be paid to the victim.

The high court, while dismissing the convict's appeal, said that the correctness of the forensic analysis report was not questioned by him, and the conclusion drawn by the trial court that this was a clinching piece of evidence connecting him to the crime, cannot possibly be faulted.