A Delhi court has sentenced a man to three years in jail for sexually assaulting his minor daughter, holding him guilty under the newly enacted child protection act.
Additional sessions judge Dharmesh Sharma awarded the jail term to the 45-year-old vagabond, who used to sexually assault his 15-year-old daughter under the influence of drugs, after holding him guilty under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
"In view of the testimony of the victim and the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I find that prosecution has been able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt that the accused with sexual intent touched the girl child.
"Mere fact that he did so under state of intoxication or effect of drug is no excuse as such state of mind was self induced and accused must be taken to know that what he was doing was wrong and immoral," the judge said.
According to the prosecution, after the death of his wife, the accused sexually assaulted his daughter between December 2012 and January after consuming drugs.
The girl had told the Child Welfare Committee (CWC) that she along with her father and sister was staying at a gurudwara in Connaught Place when her father used to sexually assault her.
A case was registered against the man at Parliament Street police station.
During the trial, the man said he was falsely implicated by his daughter at the behest of members of CWC.
The court turned down his contention, saying the girl had no motive whatsoever to depose falsely against him.
"It is a ridiculous argument that she deposed falsely as she has now been provided with basic amenities by the NGO. It is the diabolical act of the convict that has brought about a situation where the girl child and her sister have no option but to trust total strangers for their life and security.
"The state of mind of the girl child was clearly visible during recording of her testimony and the acts of the convict have caused an irreparable emotional, physical and psychological impact on her. At the cost of repetition, self induced intoxication is no excuse nor mitigating circumstance that could warrant taking a lenient view in favour of the convict," the judge said.
