Shillong, May 22: The Meghalaya High Court has dismissed an appeal and upheld the conviction and 14-year rigorous imprisonment awarded to Saddam Hussain for sexually assaulting a 9-year-old girl in West Garo Hills in 2018.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice W Diengdoh on Friday said “no interference is warranted” in the judgment dated May 8, 2023, passed by the Special Judge (POCSO), Tura, which had found Hussain guilty under Sections 5(m)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

“Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and having perused the evidence on record, including the documents, we are of the opinion that no interference is warranted in the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence,” the bench held in its 11-page judgment pronounced on May 22.

According to the prosecution, Hussain, a neighbour of the survivor, sexually assaulted her on June 23, 2018 at his residence. The survivor informed her mother the same night, following which her father lodged an FIR with Phulbari Police Station on June 24, 2018.

The Special POCSO Court, Tura, had sentenced Hussain to 14 years rigorous imprisonment and imposed a fine of ₹10,000, with three months simple imprisonment in default.

Appearing for Hussain, advocate SD Upadhaya argued that the testimony of the prosecutrix was unreliable and medical evidence did not corroborate the assault.

Rejecting the plea, the High Court noted that the survivor, then a Class III student, had given a detailed account of the assault.

The court observed that on seeing the appellant during trial, “the survivor cried and hugged her mother out of fear”.

It added, “Nothing material/significant has come in the cross-examination of this witness i.e., the survivor to discredit her testimony. Infact, there are no denials with respect to the sexual assault given in detail by PW3”.

The bench found the survivor’s account corroborated by her parents and medical officers.

Dr. Amanda Salchira W. Momin, who examined the child, deposed that she detected “vulval swelling associated with pain and itching” and “noticed some trauma afflicted to the said body part”.

To a court question, the doctor stated “the injury present in the vulva was due to the forceful penetration”.

Another doctor, Dr Janki G. Momin, found “redness around the vaginal orifice” and that “the hymen was not intact”.

“Thus, the aforesaid medical evidence that has come on record clearly corroborates the evidence of the survivor and other witnesses… that the survivor was a victim of sexual assault,” the court said.

The court also noted the appellant admitted the victim was a minor, stating “she must be between 10 to 12 years in 2018”. The birth certificate placed on record showed the survivor was 9 years old at the time.

Additional Public Prosecutor R. Gurung submitted that “the survivor was about 9 years old at the relevant time and that her evidence inspires confidence”.

Holding the trial court’s findings to be based on proper appreciation of evidence, the High Court concluded, “In view of the matter, no interference is warranted in the impugned judgment and order convicting and sentencing the appellant for the offences that he was charged”. The appeal was dismissed.

Also Read: Regional parties must unite first to protect state interest: UDP chief Metbah Lyngdoh

Also Watch

Find latest news from every corner of Northeast India at hubnetwork.in, your online source for breaking news, video coverage.

Also, Follow us on

Twitter-twitter.com/nemediahub

Youtube channel- www.youtube.com/@NortheastMediaHub2020

Instagram- www.instagram.com/ne_media_hub

Download our app from playstore – Northeast Media Hub