Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
SANJAY K. AGRAWAL, SANJAY S. AGRAWAL, JJ.
Bhuru @ Prakash Khadia, S/o Raghubar Khadia – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1293 of 2016
Decided on : 10-11-2023
POCSO Act - Conviction and Sentence - U/s 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - [U/s 6 of POCSO Act] - Summary of the acts and sections referenced and discussed by the court: The court discussed the conviction and sentence under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, focusing on the minimum punishment prescribed for aggravated penetrative sexual assault and the applicability of the amended provision. The court referred to the Supreme Court's decision in the matter of State of Uttar Pradesh v. Sonu Kushwaha, (2023) 7 SCC 475, to determine the appropriate sentence for the offence.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for committing aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a minor victim and sentenced under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The prosecution presented evidence including witness statements and medical examination reports.
Finding of the Court:
The court affirmed the appellant's conviction for the offence under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, based on the victim's statement, medical evidence, and the age of the victim. The court also reduced the appellant's sentence from 14 years to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment, in line with the principles established in the Supreme Court's decision in the matter of State of Uttar Pradesh v. Sonu Kushwaha.
Issues: The issues included the appellant's guilt, the applicability of the POCSO Act, and the appropriate sentence for the offence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the victim's statement, medical evidence, and the minimum punishment prescribed for aggravated penetrative sexual assault under Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The court also considered the principles established in the Supreme Court's decision in the matter of State of Uttar Pradesh v. Sonu Kushwaha to determine the appropriate sentence.
Final Decision: The criminal appeal was partly allowed, affirming the conviction and sentence under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and maintaining the conviction and sentence under other sections of the IPC. The appellant's sentence for the offence under Section 6 of the POCSO Act was reduced from 14 years to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment.
JUDGMENT :
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.
1. This criminal appeal preferred by the appellant, under Section 374(2) of CrPC, is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 19.7.2016 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), District Raigarh in Special Sessions Case No.47/2015, by which the appellant herein has been convicted and sentenced in the following manner:-
| Conviction | Sentence |
| U/s 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. | R.I. for 14 years and to pay fine of Rs.500/- in default whereof, additional R.I. for 6 months. |
| U/s 342 of Indian Penal Code. | R.I. for 6 months and to pay fine of Rs.50/- in default whereof, additional R.I. for 5 days. |
| U/s 506(II) of Indian Penal Code. | R.I. for 3 years and to pay fine of Rs.100/- in default whereof, additional R.I. for 15 days. |
| All sentences have been directed to run concurrently. | |
2. Case of the prosecution, in nutshell, is that on 28.3.2015 at about 4:15 p.m., the appellant herein confined the minor victim (PW-1), aged less than 7 years, in the house of one Chaitu at Village Kodatarai and committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault with him and also threatened him to life; thereby committed the aforesaid offences.
3. Further case of the prosecution is that on 28.3.2015 in the evening at about 4:00 p.m., the victim (PW-1) was found missing. A search was made for him and his crying was heard from the house of Chaitu where he was found without his clothes and the appellant was found involved in the act of unnatural penetrative sexual assault with him, by Krishna (PW-2) and Dilip (PW-6) who then brought the victim to his house and narrated the incident to his father Mandhar (PW-4) who lodged the FIR (Exhibit P-4) and wheels of investigation started running. Nazri Naksha was prepared vide Exhibit P-13. The victim (PW-1) was subjected to medical examination vide Exhibit P-7 conducted by Dr. S. Lakda (PW-10) who found tender redness in perianal region of the victim and his anus was found ruptured. The anus slide (Exhibit 'A') of the victim was sent to the FSL for chemical examination in which no human sperms were found. The appellant was also medically examined vide Exhibit P-6. Statements of witnesses were recorded. Appellant was apprehended vide Arrest Memo (Exhibit P-14).
4. After completion of investigation, the appellant was charge-sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 342, 506 (II), 377 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, 'IPC') as well as under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short, 'POCSO Act') before the concerned jurisdictional Criminal Court from where, after committal, the case was transferred to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, (F.T.C.), Raigarh for trial and its disposal in accordance with law, in which the appellant abjured his guilt, took a plea of false implication and entreated for trial.
5. During the course of trial, in order to bring home the offence, the prosecution has examined as many as 14 witnesses and exhibited 18 documents. In defence, though no witness has been examined but the statement of one Sanju Khadia has been enclosed as Exhibit D-1. Statement of the appellant was recorded under Section 313 of CrPC in which he denied circumstances appearing against him in prosecution case, pleaded innocence and false implication.
6. After conclusion of trial, the Trial Court, by impugned judgment dated 19.7.2016, on appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on record, convicted the appellant for the offences punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act as well as under Sections 342 & 506 (II) of IPC and sentenced him as mentioned in para-1 of this judgment, against which the present appeal has been filed by the appellant calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of the impugned
Penetrative sexual assault on minor child – There is no option before Court but to impose minimum sentence on accused.
(1) Any act of sexual assault or sexual harassment to children should be viewed very seriously.(2) Child needs extra protection – No leniency can be shown to an accused who has committed offences und....
The minimum punishment for aggravated penetrative sexual assault under Section 6 of the POCSO Act was 10 years at the time of the offence, necessitating a modification of the appellant's sentence fro....
The court ruled that under Section 42 of the POCSO Act, the appellant should only be punished under the provision providing the greater penalty, affirming the conviction but modifying the sentence.
The conviction under the POCSO Act was upheld amidst witness discrepancies, highlighting the importance of victim's consistent testimony; sentence was modified to five years for proportionality based....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the conclusive evidence of penetrative sexual assault on a minor victim below the age of 12 years, leading to the conviction under relevant sect....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
