Shillong, September 16: The Meghalaya High Court on Wednesday set aside the conviction of Emanuel Marwein in a POCSO case, holding that the prosecution had failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that he was the person who committed the alleged sexual assault.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice W. Diengdoh allowed Marwein’s appeal against the October 12, 2022 judgment of the Special Judge (POCSO), West Khasi Hills District, Nongstoin. The trial court had convicted him under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and Section 506 of the IPC.
Marwein had been sentenced to 10 years’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of ₹25,000 under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, besides two years’ rigorous imprisonment under Section 506 of the IPC.
The case arose from a complaint lodged at Nongstoin Police Station in June 2017 concerning the alleged sexual assault of a minor. The FIR was registered following a complaint based on a letter stated to have been written by the survivor to her grandmother.
While examining the evidence, the High Court noted significant inconsistencies regarding the identity of the alleged perpetrator. The survivor identified Marwein during the trial, but the court observed that the account recorded by the doctor during her medical examination differed on the identity of the accused. According to the doctor’s testimony, the survivor had referred to the alleged assailant only as “Mama”, while accompanying relatives gave the name “Phring Monday Marwein” — a name which the court specifically noted was not that of the appellant.
The Bench said there was a “clear dichotomy” between the survivor’s evidence in court and the medical evidence regarding the name of the accused, noting that although both persons referred to were uncles, their names were different. The court also found that the letter relied upon for registration of the FIR did not mention the name of the alleged assailant.
Another discrepancy noted by the Bench concerned the dates. The letter was dated June 28, 2017, while the FIR had been lodged on June 8, 2017 — about 20 days earlier — even though the prosecution case was that the FIR had been registered on the basis of that letter.
The High Court said this discrepancy “does not stand to reason” and concluded that the prosecution had failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that Marwein, and Marwein alone, had committed the offence.
Accordingly, the court allowed the appeal and quashed the 2022 conviction and sentence passed by the Special POCSO Court. The Bench ordered that Marwein be released forthwith if he is not required in any other case. It also directed that any fine deposited by him be refunded.
