SHILLONG, July 25: The High Court of Meghalaya has rejected an appeal from a teacher who was found guilty of molesting his tuition student.
The appeal was filed against the conviction order of October 11, 2022, and the order of sentence passed two days later by the Special Judge (POCSO) of West Garo Hills in Tura under Section 8 read with Section 18 of the POCSO Act.
Through the orders, the appellant was convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 18 months with a fine of Rs 20,000 and another six months in prison in default of payment.
Materials available on record say the appellant was a teacher in a school where the victim studied.
The victim, then a 12-year-old Class VII student, used to go for private tuition to the appellant. On May 21, 2016, the father of the survivor lodged an FIR alleging that on May 16, the appellant dropped his daughter back home after the completion of tuition and started molesting her after finding no one around.
The grandmother of the victim, who was in the adjacent room, thought something was wrong and secretly saw the appellant molesting the minor girl. The appellant left the place before she could raise an alarm.
The school committee members were informed about the matter but they allegedly did not take the necessary action.
Based on the FIR, the Tura Women PS Case No. 18 (05) 2016 under Section 7/8 of the POCSO Act was registered and the matter was investigated.
Upon completion of the investigation, a charge sheet was filed against the appellant on November 29, 2016. Thereafter, charges under relevant sections of the POCSO Act were framed against the appellant by the trial court on March 10, 2017, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
The prosecution in support of its case examined 11 witnesses and exhibited eight documents.
After completion of the prosecution evidence, the statement of the appellant was recorded under Section 313 of the CrPC on January 17, 2022. The appellant also examined four witnesses in his defence and challenged the order of conviction and sentence issued eight months later.
After hearing the arguments, the high court on Thursday upheld the trial court’s judgment against the appellant.
“The bail bonds of the appellant, if any, are hereby cancelled. The appellant is directed to surrender before the trial court and be taken into custody forthwith to serve the sentence,” the high court said.
