Recent court rulings in Mumbai and Pune have led to two different results: one defendant was found not guilty, while another had a life sentence confirmed in separate cases involving the POCSO Act.

孟買與浦那最近的法院裁決導向了兩個不同的結果：在兩宗涉及 POCSO 法案的獨立案件中，一名被告被裁定無罪，而另一名被告則被維持終身監禁。

In the first case, a special POCSO court acquitted a 31-year-old man regarding accusations from 2013. The prosecution asserted that the man and five minors had assaulted a 14-year-old boy and filmed the incident without permission. However, the court decided that there was not enough evidence for a conviction. Specifically, the digital evidence was not handled correctly, making it unacceptable in court. Furthermore, the court noted that the police report was filed fifteen days late and that the victim's testimony was inconsistent and lacked supporting evidence.

在第一宗案件中，一個 POCSO 特別法院宣判一名 31 歲男子就 2013 年的指控無罪。控方主張該男子與五名未成年人襲擊了一名 14 歲男孩，並在未經許可的情況下將過程拍攝下來。然而，法院認定沒有足夠證據定罪。具體而言，數位證據處理不正確，導致在法院中不可被接納。此外，法院指出警方報告延遲了 15 天才提交，且受害者的證詞不一致且缺乏支持證據。

In contrast, the Bombay High Court upheld the life sentence of a man who raped his 17-year-old daughter in 2015. The defense argued that the victim was not credible because she did not tell a local shopkeeper about the incident immediately. However, the court rejected this argument, stating that a victim of family abuse would logically avoid telling a stranger. The judges found the victim's detailed account to be consistent and supported by other family members. Consequently, the court dismissed the father's claim that his wife had conspired to frame him, as there was no evidence to support this.

相反地，孟買高等法院維持了一名於 2015 年強姦 17 歲女兒的男子的終身監禁判決。辯方主張受害者不可信，因為她並未立即將事件告知當地店主。然而，法院駁回了這一論點，指出家庭虐待的受害者在邏輯上會避免告知陌生人。法官認定受害者的詳細描述是一致的，且有其他家庭成員的支持。因此，法院駁回了父親聲稱其妻子陰謀陷害他的主張，因為沒有證據支持此說法。

These two cases highlight how important it is to have reliable evidence and a careful evaluation of victim testimony to reach a legal decision under the POCSO Act.

這兩宗案件凸顯了在 POCSO 法案下，要做出法律決定，擁有可靠證據與仔細評估受害者的證詞是多麼重要。