Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CHANDRASEKHARAN SUDHA
Amit – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
CHANDRASEKHARAN SUDHA, J.
1. This appeal under Section 374 (2) read with Section 383 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (the Cr.P.C.) has been filed by accused no. 1(A1) in Sessions Case No. 1653/2016 (Old Case No. 169/2013) on the file of Additional Session Judge-01, (POCSO), South-East District, Saket Courts, New Delhi, assailing the judgment dated 04.10.2019 and order on sentence dated 18.10.2019 as per which he has been convicted and sentenced for the offences punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (the IPC ) and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (the PoCSO Act).
2. The prosecution case is that on 24.07.2013 at about 04:00 pm, A1 and accused no. 2 (A2), in furtherance of their common intention, kidnapped PW5 and PW9 from their lawful guardianship and took them to Suratgarh, Rajasthan, where A1 committed penetrative sexual assault on PW5. It is also alleged that accused no. 3 (A3) wrongfully confined PW5 and PW9 at his house and abetted the commission of the penetrative sexual assault. Hence, the accused persons are alleged to have committed the offences punishable under Sections 363 , 366A, 368, 376 read w
Consent of a minor is immaterial in cases of rape; a child's marital status does not absolve the accused of legal liability for sexual offenses.
The court affirmed that consent of a minor is irrelevant in rape cases, reinforcing statutory protections and addressing evidential credibility.
The court established that corroborative evidence is essential in sexual assault cases, and the absence of such evidence led to the acquittal of one accused and the modification of the sentence for t....
The conviction for kidnapping was not sustainable due to lack of evidence for 'taking' or 'enticement', and doubts regarding the allegations of rape based on evidence suggesting a consensual relation....
A conviction for sexual assault cannot be upheld where the victim's testimony contains material inconsistencies, suggesting a consensual relationship rather than coercion.
The court upheld the conviction for rape under IPC, emphasizing that a reliable witness's testimony can suffice for conviction, despite procedural irregularities.
Point of Law : Hon'ble Supreme Court held that action of the accused in stripping prosecutrixes and himself and rubbing his genitals against those of the victims was indeed an endeavour to commit sex....
The conviction under IPC and POCSO was quashed due to insufficient evidence and contradictions in the victim's testimony, highlighting the need for corroboration in sexual assault cases.
Rape – Consent of minor has no legal sanctity.
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
