HYDERABAD: In a recent judgment under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, a local court said that the sole testimony of a minor victim, if consistent and credible, is sufficient to establish guilt in cases of sexual assault.
The case pertained to the sexual abuse of a five-year-old UKG student at a private school in Kothapet in 2022, where a 39-year-old school attender, Velishala Sudhakar, was sentenced to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment. The victim, during her testimony, identified Sudhakar as the “uncle” who lured her to an unfamiliar room during snack time, touched her body and private parts and fled when she resisted by slapping him.
During the arguments, the girl told the court that Sudhakar had previously committed similar offences against her. While the defence lawyer cross-examined the victim at length, the court said, “The evidence given by the girl who is the sufferer, is beyond all reasonable doubt. Furthermore, it is an established legal principle that the testimony of the sole victim is often sufficient for conviction.”
The court noted that the five-year-old victim, due to her tender age, was unaware of the gravity of the heinous act committed against her. For three days following the October 16, 2022, incident, she did not disclose the assault to anyone, including her mother. It was only when the child developed a fever and her mother observed bleeding from her private parts that suspicions arose. Initially, the mother administered paracetamol syrup to alleviate the fever before rushing her to a private hospital. During the medical examination, scratch marks on the child’s private parts prompted the mother to gently enquire, leading the girl to reveal the assault.
The formal complaint was lodged with Chaitanyapuri police station on October 22, seven days after the abuse. The victim’s mother explained to the court that she learned of the incident three days post-occurrence, visited the school to investigate, and after consulting her husband, decided to file the complaint to safeguard their child and pursue justice.
The court acknowledged the delayed reporting as a reflection of the family’s profound emotional and psychological turmoil, emphasising that such decisions are fraught with internal conflict, particularly when involving a parent’s protective instincts toward their child. This hesitation, the court asserted, bolstered the credibility of both the victim’s testimony and the parents’ resolve to seek accountability.
Medical reports corroborating physical injuries, coupled with the victim’s consistent and unchallenged account, conclusively established the accused’s guilt.
The defendant’s claim of false implication was dismissed as “bald and vague”, lacking any substantive evidence to undermine the prosecution’s case. The court reiterated that no credible doubts were raised about the victim’s veracity, affirming that the overwhelming evidence left no room for alternative interpretations.