The court affirmed the conviction for severe sexual assault against a minor, emphasizing the integrity of the victim's testimony and the statutory presumption of guilt under POCSO, rejecting leniency in sentencing.

ORDER :

1. Heard. Delay condoned.

2. The present petition assails the judgment and final order dated 03.07.2024 passed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla in Criminal Appeal No.562 of 2019, whereby the conviction and sentence of the petitioner under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter, 'POCSO Act') and Section 506 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE has been affirmed.

3. The facts of the case reveal a story of unspeakable betrayal of trust by none other than the father of the victim, who stands convicted for repeatedly committing aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon his own minor daughter, who was just around ten years old at the time of the incident. The acts were not isolated incidents but sustained, deliberate assaults within the safety of the home, a place where every child expects protection.

4. The Trial Court, upon meticulous evaluation of the oral testimony of the victim (PW3), the corroborating evidence of her elder sister (PW2), and the compelling forensic and medical records, had rightly returned a verdict of guilt. The High Court, in a well-reasoned judgment, has affirmed the conviction and imposed the sentence of life imprisonment, in addition to fine.

5. The jurisprudence under the POCSO Act has evolved as a bulwark against the predatory crimes targeting the innocence of childhood. Section 29 of the POCSO Act creates a statutory presumption of guilt, once foundational facts are established. In the present case, this presumption stood unrebutted. The victim’s testimony was unwavering, medically corroborated, and free from embellishment.

Her disclosure, though delayed, was truthful and borne out of perennial trauma and threats she has undergone.

6. It is now well settled that the testimony of a child victim, if found credible and trustworthy, requires no corroboration. The Courts below have not merely accepted the victim’s account, they have validated it through unimpeachable scientific evidence. The DNA report sealed the evidentiary chain and has dispelled all doubts in the prosecution case which is sought to be assailed by the petitioner.

7. The argument raised before us is that the petitioner was falsely implicated due to strained domestic relationships and disapproval of romantic alliances of his daughters is completely hollow. No daughter, however aggrieved, would fabricate charges of this magnitude against her own father merely to escape household discipline.

8. This Court has repeatedly underscored that in offences involving sexual abuse, especially against children, the trauma suffered by the victim is lifelong. The scars are not merely physical but psychological, cutting across every fibre of trust, safety, and dignity. When the perpetrator is none other than the father, the natural guardian, the crime assumes a demonic character.

9. Such offences deserve nothing but the severest condemnation and deterrent punishment. To pardon such depravity under any guise would be a travesty of justice and a betrayal of the child protection mandate embedded in our constitutional and statutory framework.

10. As per ancient scriptures:

“Yatra naryastu pujyante ramante tatra devata?, yatraitaastu na pujyante sarvastatra aphala? kriya?.”

"Where women are honoured, divinity flourishes; and where they are dishonoured, all acts become fruitless."

This verse reflects not merely a cultural principle but a constitutional vision. The dignity of women is non-negotiable, and our legal system must not permit repeated intrusion into that dignity under the