Calcutta High Court has upheld a three-year jail term for a man convicted of sexually assaulting a girl under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act). The court stated that the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, cannot be applied to convicts under the POCSO Act.

The case involved allegations that the accused, who was a teenager at the time, had pawed at and touched the breast of a girl while she was out with her mother in a public place. The court relied on the consistent testimony given by the victim girl to the magistrate and trial court, finding her credible and rejecting claims to impeach her credibility. The court also emphasized that the non-examination of the victim girl by the police was of no consequence when the victim's statements had a ring of truth.

The appellant's counsel had argued that the appellant, who had no criminal antecedents, had since become a responsible young man supporting his family. However, the court ruled that since the POCSO Act is a special law, the Probation of Offenders Act cannot be applied in this case. The court referred to the Supreme Court's rulings in Superintendent, Central Excise v. Bahubali and State v. Ratan Lal Arora to support its decision.

The incident took place in 2014, where the appellant allegedly pawed at and touched the victim girl's breast while she was walking with her mother on a footpath. The girl immediately screamed, and the appellant was caught by the public. The police arrived promptly, and a case was registered under Section 354A (sexual harassment) of the Indian Penal Code, along with Section 8 (sexual assault) of the POCSO Act.

The appellant's counsel argued that the alleged touch could have been accidental since the incident occurred in a crowded area. However, the court noted that the appellant did not make any statement indicating that he did not intend to commit the offense when caught. The court also dismissed the argument that the girl was not medically examined by a doctor, stating that such an examination was not required in the given circumstances under Section 8 of the POCSO Act.

Considering these factors and others, the court upheld the appellant's conviction and sentence, emphasizing the importance of the POCSO Act in cases of child sexual offenses.

Prakash Shaw v. State of West Bengal & Anr. (C.R.A. 69 of 2018)