Musthafa's appeal dismissed; court confirms statutory minimum sentence amidst his history of repeat offences
The Kerala High Court has upheld the conviction and sentencing of Musthafa, who was charged under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 7 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The judgment, delivered by Justice A. Badharudeen on March 11, 2026, confirms the decisions made by the Fast Track Special Court in Koyilandy.
Musthafa's appeal challenged the verdict of the Special Court, which had sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment of two years under IPC Section 363 and three years under Sections 7 and 8 of the POCSO Act, alongside fines totaling Rs. 15,000. His arguments centered around purported discrepancies in the victim's testimony, such as the non-disclosure of the exact date of the incident and the non-examination of a witness, CW3. However, the High Court dismissed these claims, emphasizing the reliability of the victim’s testimony, which was corroborated by other witnesses and documentary evidence like birth certificates and school registers.
The court further noted that Musthafa is a habitual offender with multiple convictions under the POCSO Act, confirming that the imposed sentence was the statutory minimum and any reduction was legally impermissible. His criminal history includes involvement in four other cases, with sentences ranging from two to twenty years for various offenses under the IPC and POCSO Act.
Justice Badharudeen's judgment highlighted the credible identification of Musthafa by the victim, who recognized him as a familiar figure from his neighborhood. The court found the victim’s explanation for initially not recalling the exact date of the incident satisfactory, validating the prosecution's case despite the non-examination of the victim’s father, CW3, whose testimony was deemed non-essential as his knowledge was secondhand.
The High Court's decision reinforces the legal framework protecting children from sexual offenses, underscoring the importance of victim testimony in securing convictions. Musthafa remains in custody at the Central Prison and Correctional Home, Thavanur, as the court directed the immediate forwarding of the judgment for compliance.
Bottom line:-
Conviction under Section 363 IPC and Section 7 read with 8 of the POCSO Act upheld. Victim's testimony corroborated by other evidence found reliable. Non-disclosure of exact date of the incident and non-examination of a witness (CW3) not fatal to the prosecution case.
Statutory provision(s): Section 363 IPC, Sections 7 and 8 of the POCSO Act, Section 415(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Section 164 CrPC, Section 161(3) CrPC, Section 428 CrPC, Section 357(1)(b) CrPC.
Musthafa v. State of Kerala, (Kerala) : Law Finder Doc id # 2893459
