The Meghalaya High Court has upheld the conviction and 10-year prison sentences of three men found guilty under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act for the gang rape of a 15-year-old girl in West Khasi Hills in 2016, dismissing their appeals against the trial court’s verdict.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice W. Diengdoh rejected the criminal appeals filed by Cleverstrein Marngar, Proningstar Marngar and Basnes Ryntathiang, holding that the Special POCSO Court had correctly convicted the accused and that there was no reason to interfere with the judgment or sentence.
The case arose from an FIR lodged at Nongstoin Police Station after the survivor’s mother alleged that her daughter had been gang-raped by six men on September 11, 2016. During the investigation, eight persons were arrested. Three were found to be children in conflict with the law and were tried separately before the Juvenile Justice Board, while the remaining five were convicted by the Special POCSO Court. Of those, only three challenged the conviction before the High Court.
The appellants argued that the prosecution had failed to establish the case beyond reasonable doubt. They questioned the survivor’s identification of the accused, highlighted alleged inconsistencies in the evidence and claimed that changes to the charges during the trial had prejudiced their defence.
The High Court rejected these arguments, observing that the prosecution had successfully established the foundational facts required under the POCSO Act. The Bench found the survivor’s testimony to be consistent, reliable and unshaken during cross-examination.
The court further noted that her version of events was corroborated by the testimony of her friend and family members, medical evidence and the Test Identification Parade. Medical findings indicating recent sexual assault, penetrative injuries and other physical injuries supported the prosecution’s case. The Bench also observed that the survivor had correctly identified all the accused except one co-accused during the identification parade, adding that although a Test Identification Parade is not substantive evidence, it has corroborative value.
Addressing the defence’s objection regarding the delayed production of the survivor’s birth certificate after the charges were altered, the court held that the document had not been challenged and that the timing of its production did not affect the case since the survivor’s age had never been disputed.
Concluding that the prosecution had proved the charges and that the accused had failed to rebut the statutory presumptions available under the POCSO Act, the High Court dismissed all three appeals, leaving the convictions and 10-year prison sentences imposed by the trial court unchanged.
