4 year old sexually assaulted, man detained

The incident took place in July 2023 when the child was alone at home with her younger sibling, when the accused, a neighbour known to the family as “Mama”, allegedly assaulted her. The child later told her mother that he had inserted his finger into her “place of urination,” causing pain and bleeding. During the trial, the child testified the same.

MUMBAI: A special court under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act has convicted a 42-year-old man for aggravated sexual assault on a four-year-old girl and sentenced him to five years’ rigorous imprisonment. However, the court acquitted him of rape and penetrative sexual assault charges, citing lack of medical evidence of penetration.

4 year old sexually assaulted, man detained

A fine of ₹10,000 has been imposed, of which ₹8,000 will be paid to the victim as compensation.

The incident took place in July 2023 when the child was alone at home with her younger sibling, when the accused, a neighbour known to the family as “Mama”, allegedly assaulted her. The child later told her mother that he had inserted his finger into her “place of urination,” causing pain and bleeding. During the trial, the child testified the same.

The court deemed the child reliable despite her age “The oral testimony of the victim girl is reliable and acceptable. Her testimony is inspiring confidence though she is a child witness,” the court said. Statements of the victim’s mother and maternal aunt, along with evidence showing the accused was apprehended the next day after a confrontation with the family, were also treated as corroborative evidence.

However, the court held that penetrative sexual assault was not proved. Referring to the medical examination, the judge noted there were no injuries on the child’s body or genitals and that the medical opinion found “no evidence of vaginal and urethral penetration”.

At the same time, the court held that the prosecution had proved sexual assault by touching. The court ultimately concluded, “The evidence is not sufficient to prove the fact of penetrative sexual assault. It is sufficient to believe that the accused touched the private part of the victim girl.”

Holding that the child was below 12 years of age at the time of the offence, the court said the act attracted the offence of aggravated sexual assault and added that the accused had taken “disadvantage of her tender age and vulnerability,” causing mental trauma to the victim.