Judge upholds jail term of man after 5-year-old explains sexual assault on her through a doll
Justice SP Garg relied on the oral testimony of the girl who by referring to the private parts of the ‘doll’ in her hand conveyed what had happened with her.delhi Updated: Jun 17, 2017 11:21 IST
The Delhi High Court has confirmed the jail term of a man who sexually assaulting a five-year-old, relying on the description given by the child of her ordeal through a baby doll.
Justice SP Garg relied on the oral testimony of the girl who by referring to the private parts of the ‘doll’ in her hand conveyed what had happened with her.
“She had conveyed as to what was done by the appellant with her. Nothing more can be expected from a child aged around five years considering her limited understanding,” the judge said while upholding the five-year jail term awarded to the 23-year-old man by a trial court here.
The incident dates to July 2014 when the girl was going to school with her 10-year-old brother. Convict Hunny gave Rs 10 to the boy and asked him to bring something from a shop and kidnapped the girl.
The man took her to Narela in north west Delhi, sexually assaulted her and left the child near her house.
A neighbour found the child crying and wandering on the streets without her skirt and took her home. Initially, the minor, who was in a state of shock, did not disclose anything. She later told her mother about the incident.
The accused was identified with the help of CCTV footage of the area from where the child was kidnapped.
To make the child comfortable at the time of recording her testimony in court, the sessions judge gave a doll to the girl which kept her engaged.
“The crime committed is very serious. The victim a child aged around five years was sexually assaulted and defiled...The court can well understand the trauma of the kid whereby she suffered sexual assault at such a small age,” the high court said.
“The appellant aged around 23 years was well aware of as to what he was doing. The trial court has already taken a lenient view and no modification of the sentence order is called for; there being a ‘minimum’ sentence under Section 10 POCSO Act,” the bench said dismissing the appeal made by the convict.