Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Mr. Justice Navneet Kumar, J
Sonu Mansuri, son of Late Samin Mansuri @ Md. Samim – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
NAVNEET KUMAR, J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Spl. PP representing the State.
2. The instant interlocutory application has been filed for suspension of sentence of the appellant by enlarging him on bail during pendency of the instant criminal appeal, which has been preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence both dated 16.03.2024 passed in Special POCSO Case No.70 of 2018 arising out of Pakur (Town) P.S. Case No.164 of 2018 by the learned Special Judge POCSO Act, Pakur whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 8 of POCSO Act and under Section 354B of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years with a fine of Rs.25,000/- only for the offences punishable under Section 354(B) of the IPC and in default of payment of fine, further directed to undergo R.I. for six months. No sentence has been passed under Section 8 of POCSO Act in terms of Section 42 of the POCSO Act.
3. The learned defence counsel at the outset has submitted on behalf of the appellant that the appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Section 8 of POCSO Act 2012 and Section 354(B) of the IPC but the prosecution has failed du
The prosecution must conclusively establish the victim's age for a valid conviction under the POCSO Act, which was not done in this case.
The court upheld the conviction under sexual assault laws despite challenges regarding the victim's age, emphasizing the credibility of the victim's testimony.
The presumption of guilt under the POCSO Act applies, and the significant age difference between the accused and the victim renders the alleged crime particularly heinous.
The prosecution bears the burden of proving majority, and the absence of key documentation can undermine a conviction under the POCSO Act.
The conviction under Section 363 IPC was not supported by sufficient evidence as the victim voluntarily accompanied the appellant, warranting bail due to the bailable nature of the offense.
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
