Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Sujit Narayan Prasad, Sanjay Prasad
Subhankar Das @ Shubhankar Das – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the basis of the charges and the involvement of the accused. (Para 1 , 5) |
| 2. sexual abuse of minor and coercion details (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 3. summary of charges accepted in trial. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. allegation of charge manipulation and lack of defense opportunity (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. the prosecution's response to charges based on evidence. (Para 17 , 19) |
| 6. sufficient evidence against the accused (Para 18 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 7. court's observations and the legal framework for charge alterations. (Para 23 , 24) |
| 8. authority to amend charges during trial (Para 26 , 28 , 30) |
| 9. determination of victim's age under pocso (Para 54 , 55) |
| 10. proper procedure for age assessment in pocso cases (Para 58 , 59 , 60) |
| 11. conditions for suspension of sentence (Para 68 , 69) |
| 12. final ruling on the application. (Para 71 , 72) |
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
I.A. No. 13404 of 2024
Prayer
1. The instant interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of appellant for suspension of sentence dated 22.09.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Jamshedpur in Special (POCSO) Case No. 1325 of 2017 arising out of Sidhgora P.S. Case No.78 of 2017, whereby and whereunder, the
The appellant's conviction under the POCSO Act was upheld as the victim was underage at the time of the offense, notwithstanding the alteration in charges, which did not prejudice the appellant's def....
The court affirmed that consent is irrelevant if the victim is a minor, emphasizing that credible evidence, especially concerning age, is paramount in cases under the POCSO Act.
The judgment reinforces the evidentiary standards in sexual assault cases under the POCSO Act, particularly the weight of victim testimony and the statutory presumption of guilt.
The Supreme Court clarified that age determination in POCSO cases must follow statutory provisions strictly, and bail courts cannot exceed their jurisdiction to conduct mini-trials on age credibility....
The court established that the police must obtain a medical report determining the victim's age in POCSO cases, emphasizing the mandatory nature of this requirement under the law.
The court established that the burden of proving a victim's age lies with the prosecution, and the absence of reliable evidence necessitates giving the benefit of doubt to the accused.
The jurisdiction of a Special Court under the special legislation is strictly dependent on the victim's age. When age is disputed, the court must conduct a formal inquiry under the relevant juvenile ....
The court ruled that the prosecution failed to prove the victim's age as below 18 years, thus the POCSO Act was not applicable, leading to a modification of the conviction under IPC.
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
