Sexual assault on children corrodes their smile, memories: Court

The scars of a sexual assault do not heal in the mind of a child and corrodes any pleasant memory, a Delhi court has observed while sentencing a man to 10 years in jail for sodomising a four-year old.
Additional Sessions Judge Seema Maini, while awarding rigorous imprisonment to north Delhi resident Manoj and slapping a fine of Rs 30,000 on him, said "sexual assault upon a child leaves its deep rooted scars on the entire persona of the victim. These scars do not heal up ever, despite the best medical aid. They are corrosive in nature, corroding every smile, every pleasant memory and every moment of happiness coming to the victim's way."

The court said in this country, where idols are worshipped, rivers worshipped and fast performed for long life of children, it was unfortunate that some of them are forced to live a life of frustration, depression and morbidity.
It also granted a compensation of Rs three lakh to the victim, apart from Rs 20,000 which would be given to him from the fine amount.
The convict, who was the minor's neighbour, has robbed the child of his jovial and carefree childhood, his freewheeling playful attitude towards the routine activities of life, thrusting upon him an apprehensive approach towards one and all, the court said.

"In a country, where idols are worshipped, rivers are treated as a mother-figure, fasts are performed frequently for the long life of one's husband and children, it is an unfortunate scenario that some of these 'children', who are blessed with a long life are forced to live the life of frustration, depression and morbidity," it said.

According to the complaint filed by the child's mother, on September 8, 2014, Manoj took the kid to his house on the pretext of feeding him.
As there was no news of the child for a long time, she went to the convict's house and saw him running away. The child was found unconscious.

The child told the probe agency that he was beaten up and forced to have carnal intercourse.
The convict had claimed that he was falsely implicated the case after a quarrel with the family.
The court found the testimonies of the witnesses and the victim trustworthy and convicted the man.