2026 Supreme(HP) 220

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA, J.
Paramjeet Singh @ Pamma – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. – Respondent
Cr. Appeal No. 231 of 2015
Decided On : 18-03-2026

Victim's reliable testimony sufficient for POCSO conviction without corroboration; FIR delay and absent injuries immaterial; minor contradictions ignorable; presumption under s.29 shifts burden post foundational facts; accused failed to rebut.

Headnote:(A) Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Sections 4, 29 and 30 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 293 - Penetrative sexual assault on minor by anal penetration after showing porn clip - Conviction and sentence of seven years RI and fine under POCSO s.4 and one year RI and fine under IPC s.293 upheld in appeal - Victim’s testimony natural, reliable and creditworthy despite minor contradictions, delay in FIR and absence of anal injuries - Medical evidence of discomfort and pain during examination sufficient - Porn clip on seized mobile corroborates victim - Foundational facts proved shifting onus to accused to rebut presumption u/s 29 which he failed to do. (Paras 6, 12-39)

(B) Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 145 - Delay in lodging FIR not fatal in sexual offences especially involving minors - Courts not to discard testimony for failure to raise alarm or narrate immediately - Minor discrepancies in peripheral details bound to occur over time and ignorable if not shaking core - No requirement of corroboration for victim of sexual assault - Contradictions with prior statements require drawing witness attention failing which credit unimpeached - Case property integrity upheld despite minor seal discrepancy as handling witnesses unshaken in cross. (Paras 15-31)

Facts of the case:
Minor victim sent with accused for vehicle repair; accused took him home, attempted to show porn video, removed underwear and penetrated anus causing pain. Victim perplexed, informed mother same evening who confronted accused; father lodged FIR next day after return. Investigation included medicals, seizures, FSL report confirming porn clip. Trial court convicted; appeal urged improbability, delay unexplained, no injuries, contradictions, false implication motive.

Findings of Court:
Victim and mother testimonies consistent on core; defence suggestions denied and unsubstantiated; prosecution case proved beyond doubt warranting no acquittal.

Issues: Effect of FIR delay, absence of anal injuries, victim attending school next day, non-examination of locality persons, contradictions between victim and mother, integrity of case property, omission of porn clip in FIR, application of POCSO presumption.

Ratio Decidendi: Victim testimony entitled to great weight absent corroboration need; delay attributable to family dynamics in sexual offences; medical discomfort corroborative; time-lapsed minor contradictions peripheral; unchallenged witness testimonies binding; presumption u/ss 29/30 arises post foundational facts with accused onus on preponderance of probabilities unmet. Result : Appeal dismissed; trial court judgment affirmed.