JUDGMENT & ORDER : Heard Mr. K. Pathak, learned Amicus Curiae, appearing for the appellant and Mr. D. Das, leaned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the Opposite Party. 2. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the judgment and sentence dated 23.09.2015, passed by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Golaghat in Sessions Case (Spl. POSCO Case) No. 20/2015 (GR Case No. 235/2015) under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act. 2012 (in short the POSCO Act), in which he was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 10 (ten) years, pay fine of Rs. 2,000.00 (Rupees two thousand) and in default to undergo further imprisonment of 1 (one) month. 3. The present appellant Sri Lakhi Murmur, son of late Bengal Murmur, a resident of Jugalati Goan under Bokakhat Police Station in the District of Golaghat, Assam was prosecuted as accused in Bokakhat P.S. Case No. 31/2015 under Section 376 IPC read with Section 8 of the POSCO Act. It is the case of the prosecution that on 07.02.2015 at about 10.00 a.m. in the morning he committed rape upon his niece Smti Anita Soren (actual name is withheld) aged about 14 years old and also attempted to kill her by pressing her neck. 4. On receipt of the ejahar from the complainant Sri Hari Nath Soren, son of Haria Soren on 09.02.2015, the Officer-in-Charge of Bokakhat Police Station registered the above noted case and endorsed S.I. Phani Madhab Saikia to investigate the case. The said Investigating Officer investigated the case, examined the victim by doctor, collected report and on completion of investigation, he sent up the present accused-appellant for trial under Section 376 IPC read with Section 8 of the POSCO Act. The court of the learned Special Judge (POSCO)/the District & Sessions Judge, Golaghat framed charges under Section 6 of the POSCO Act and on being read over and explained the same to which the accused-appellant pleaded not guilty of the offence. 5. The prosecution side has examined as many as 8 (eight) witnesses including the Medical Officer and the I.O. in support of its case. After closure of the prosecution witnesses, the accused- appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in which he denied the total case and adduced no evidence in defence. 5. The prosecution side has examined as many as 8 (eight) witnesses including the Medical Officer and the I.O. in support of its case. After closure of the prosecution witnesses, the accused- appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in which he denied the total case and adduced no evidence in defence. The learned court below, after considering all the material evidence on record and after hearing the argument of both the learned counsels of prosecution and defence side finally, the appellant was convicted and sentenced as aforesaid. Being aggrieved, the accused appellant has preferred this appeal from jail. 6. Mr. K. Pathak, learned Amicus Curiae, appearing on behalf of the accused-appellant submits that the offence as apparent from the materials on record and from the statement of the victim is a case of aggravated sexual assault as provided under Section 9 of the POSCO Act. Such being the position, the accused-appellant ought to have convicted and sentenced under Section 10 of the POSCO Act. The punishment as prescribed, shall not be less than 5 years, which may extend to 7 years and shall also be liable to fine. In support of his contention, Mr. Pathak submits that the case is well covered under Section 9(n) and 9(p) of the Act. Accordingly, Mr. Pathak submits that the conviction and sentence of the accused-appellant is liable to be reduced to the maximum period as prescribed by Section 10 of the said Act as against the one for 10 years. 7. Mr. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submit that the submission of the learned Amicus Curiae cannot be taken into consideration. If the Medical Report (Ext.2) is taken into consideration, as apparent from the said report, the hymen of the victim was found to be ruptured. Accordingly, if the said medical piece of evidence is considered then the offence will fall under “aggravated penetrative sexual assault” as defined under Section 5 of the POCSO Act. In such a nature of offence and/ or offences, Section 6 of the said Act stipulates the punishment which shall not be less than 10 years but which may extend to for imprisonment for life and shall also be liable to fine. Mr. In such a nature of offence and/ or offences, Section 6 of the said Act stipulates the punishment which shall not be less than 10 years but which may extend to for imprisonment for life and shall also be liable to fine. Mr. Das further submits that the accused-appellant is the uncle of the victim girl and it is the case of the prosecution that as the daughter of the accused-appellant eloped with someone as such, the victim girl who was residing with PW 2 (the complainant) was requested to stay in the house of the accused-appellant in order to do domestic works which the PW 2 agreed. Thus, the present case falls within Section 5(n) and 5(p) of the Act inasmuch as, the accused-appellant was in a position of trust or authority of the victim child. Accordingly, there is no error committed by the learned court below and it requires no interference in the judgment and sentence passed against the appellant. 8. Considered the submissions of both the learned counsels and perused the evidence of the victim girl (PW1). From the evidence, it is apparent that the accused-appellant is her own uncle and on the date of occurrence, she was staying alone in the house of the said accused-appellant. The victim girl specifically deposed that there was complete penetration on her against her will. In this manner, the said accused appellant raped on her and she felt abdominal pain. The said piece of evidence from the mouth of the victim is clearly supported by the medical report wherein it is reported that her hymen was found to be ruptured on medical examination. This is sufficient enough to prove the case of the prosecution wherefrom it can very well be concluded beyond any reasonable doubt, that the accused appellant is related to the victim girl and there was deep penetration which covers the offence as prescribed under Section 5(n) and 5 (p) of the POSCO Act, 2012. The age of the victim as per the medical report is above 14 (fourteen) years but below 16 (sixteen) years. She is a child as per definition prescribed in the Act. 9. The accused-appellant in his statement given under Section 313 Cr.P.C. tried to project his defence that he had beaten up the victim girl for not attending the domestic works and he never raped her. She is a child as per definition prescribed in the Act. 9. The accused-appellant in his statement given under Section 313 Cr.P.C. tried to project his defence that he had beaten up the victim girl for not attending the domestic works and he never raped her. It is also tried to project by the defence that there was no cordial relation between the complainant (PW 2) and the said accused-appellant. The said accused- appellant failed to adduce any evidence in support of his defence while making the statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. nor thereafter. 10. Situated thus, this court do not find any illegality in passing the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence against the accused-appellant. More so, there is no dispute with regard to age of the victim girl and as such, this court finds no merit in this appeal and accordingly, the same is dismissed. 11. This court appreciate the assistance rendered by the learned Amicus Curiae in disposing the appeal and accordingly an amount of Rs. 7,500.00 (Rupees seven thousand five hundred) only be paid to the learned Amicus Curiae as the professional fees from the legal service authority. 12. Send back the LCR.