SC acquits POCSO accused: unexplained FIR gaps and a withheld witness sink the prosecution's case

The Supreme Court acquitted a man convicted under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 for aggravated sexual assault on a minor, holding that the prosecution's evidence fell short of proof beyond reasonable doubt. The first information report, lodged ten days after the alleged incident, omitted key facts that the complainant later introduced at trial, including that she had seen the accused near her house shortly before the incident and that another witness had told her of the assault the next day. The Court held that such a material improvement, unexplained in the FIR, is relevant under Section 11 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 to test the veracity of the prosecution's case, citing its earlier rulings in Amar Nath Jha v. Nand Kishore Singh and Ram Kumar Pandey v. State of Madhya Pradesh.

It also rejected the argument that the burden shifted to the accused under Section 106 of the Evidence Act on a 'last seen' theory, since no witness had actually placed the accused and the victim together. Separately, the Court held that the prosecution's failure to examine a material witness -- the teacher to whom the child had first disclosed the assault -- without explanation, entitled the defence to an adverse inference, following Takhaji Hiraji v. Thakore Kubersing Chamansing. The child's own failure to identify the accused in court, and a credible alibi defence, completed the case for acquittal.