[POCSO case] "Children less than age 12 asexual:" Delhi Court convicts man for raping minor girl

Children less than 12 years of age are “asexual” and normally take time to recognise that the disguised love, affection or warmth by a perpetrator is wrongful or sinful, a Delhi court observed while convicting a man for sexually assaulting a minor girl in 2017 [State v. Mustkim]..Principal District and Sessions Judge Dharmesh Sharma noted that such children, on becoming aware of the implications of such acts, eventually resist and report the incident to the near and dear ones.The Court could not persuade itself to find any blemishes in the testimony of the survivor or her story unreliable..“The testimony of the prosecutrix should not be appreciated from the point of view of an adult, but from the mindset of a child. Children often find it difficult to express themselves for a variety of reasons, and when someone close to the family subjects them to sexual abuse, they are reluctant to discuss it with their parents as they are unsure as to how their parents would react,” the judgment underscored..The convict, Mustkim, was known to the survivor’s family for they lived in the same building. He was accused of sexually assaulting the girl on the roof the building.His counsel argued that the survivor’s testimony was riddled with inconsistencies without giving the exact time and date of the alleged incident.The genuineness of two separate occasions, when she was stated to have been sexually assaulted and subsequently intimidated, was questioned on the basis of the area being densely populated and the time of the incident that reportedly took place during the day..The man was tried for offences under Section 6 of the Protection of Children against Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, which provides for punishment for committing offence of aggravated penetrative sexual assault under Section 5(l) of the POCSO Act. The latter deals with penetrative sexual assault upon a child under 12 years of age more than once or repeatedly.The girl’s testimony was stated to be of “sterling quality” having a “ring of truth” around it, enough to build the man’s conviction on it.“She did not depose in a parrot like manner and there is nothing to suggest that she had been tutored by her mother or any one else,” added the Court..Accordingly, the man was held guilty and convicted under Section 5 (l) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act.Further, from the survivor’s testimony, the Court discerned that he had threatened her not to disclose the incident to anyone. “Accused is accordingly held guilty and convicted for the offence under Section 506 (criminal intimidation) IPC,” it held.While parting with the verdict, the Court called for victim impact and social investigation reports on the convict, and posted the matter for further consideration on March 5, 2022.The crime in the case entails a minimum punishment of 20 years of prison time and a maximum of death penalty..Additional Public Prosecutor Atul Kumar Shrivastava appeared for the State. Legal aid counsel Abhijeet Ashok Bhagat represented the accused.