Rahul Soni @ Golu vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 376(3), 376(2)(n), 376AB, 376DB - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Sections 5(g), 5(l), 5(m) read with Section 6 - Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Section 3(2)(v) - Evidential value of sole testimony of prosecutrix - Conviction on solitary evidence is permissible only when the evidence inspires confidence and appears natural and truthful (Paras 19-21) - If the version is unsupported by medical evidence or surrounding circumstances are highly improbable, the court should not act on the solitary evidence of the prosecutrix (Para 21).

(B) "Sterling Witness" - A witness of very high quality and calibre whose version is unassailable, consistent from the initial statement to the court deposition, withstands strenuous cross-examination, and correlates with supporting material, scientific evidence, and expert opinion (Para 23).

(C) Corroboration - In cases where testimony is neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable, the court should seek corroboration of material particulars by reliable direct or circumstantial testimony as a requirement of the rule of prudence (Para 24).

Facts of the case:
A minor girl alleged that multiple individuals blackmailed her using an obscene video and repeatedly committed penetrative sexual assault against her at a marriage hall. The incident was reported to the police after the victim attempted suicide and subsequently narrated the events to her parents. The trial court convicted the appellants based primarily on the victim's testimony, sentencing them to imprisonment for the remainder of their natural lives.

Findings of Court:
The Court found that electronic evidence contradicted the prosecutrix's claim regarding the timing of the video and indicated a consensual relationship. Medical evidence showed no injuries, marks of recent intercourse, or struggle, and confirmed the hymen was intact. Forensic reports found no incriminating material on the victim. Furthermore, the Court observed that the victim's failure to raise an alarm despite the proximity of the venue to her father's shop and a populated locality was unnatural.

Issues: Whether the sole testimony of the prosecutrix, in the absence of medical and forensic corroboration and in the face of contradictory electronic evidence, qualifies as that of a "sterling witness" sufficient to sustain a conviction.

Ratio Decidendi: While the testimony of a victim in sexual offence cases is generally believed, it must meet the threshold of a "sterling witness" to sustain conviction without corroboration. When the testimony is contradicted by forensic and medical evidence, and the sequence of events is improbable or unnatural, the account lacks the necessary reliability. In such circumstances, the prosecution fails to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 30-34).

Result: Conviction set aside; Appellants acquitted.

Legal Category Hierarchy

1. Appeals against convictions for aggravated child sexual assault under IPC, POCSO and SC/ST Act; alleged repeated gang rape and blackmail; juvenile co-accused separately dealt with. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 18 )

2. Appellants contended testimony was general, uncorroborated by medical, forensic or electronic evidence, and caste/age proof failed; State asserted sole testimony was sufficient and corroborated by parents. (Para 7 , 8 )

3. Convictions and life sentences set aside; appeals allowed; appellants acquitted and directed to be released unless required in another case. (Para 35 , 36 )

4. Can a conviction for a sexual offence be based solely on the uncorroborated testimony of the prosecutrix?

Yes, if she is a sterling witness whose evidence is consistent, natural, and unassailable; if her testimony is unreliable, contains material contradictions, and lacks corroboration, conviction cannot be sustained, as guilt must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. (Para 17 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 33 , 34 )

5. How do material inconsistencies and lack of electronic evidence affect the prosecutrix's credibility?

Discrepancies about when the video and photographs were made, absence of any device or sharing by the accused, general and omnibus allegations, inability to identify assailants, and unnatural silence destroy credibility and prevent proof beyond reasonable doubt. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 32 )

6. What is the evidentiary significance of medical and forensic findings in a repeated gang rape case?

Absence of injuries, unruptured hymen, and no sperm or material on the victim's samples, despite repeated penetrative assault by six persons, do not by themselves negate rape but make the uncorroborated prosecutrix's version highly improbable. (Para 30 , 31 )

7. How is the victim's age proved for application of POCSO and the sixthly clause of Section 375 IPC?

The date of birth entered in the school admission register at first admission, supported by the principal's certificate and admission form, sufficiently proves the victim was below eighteen and therefore a child. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 )

8. What evidence establishes applicability of the SC/ST (PA) Act?

The Act applies when a caste certificate issued by the competent authority proves the victim belongs to a Scheduled Caste and the accused do not claim Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe status. (Para 10 )

JUDGMENT :

Ramkumar Choubey, J.

The appellants have preferred these appeals under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the impugned judgment dated 7.3.2023 passed in Special Case No.30/202 by the Special Judge, Waidhan, District Singrauli where by convicted the appellants for the offences under Sections 376(3), 376(2)(n), 376AB and 376DB of IPC, under Sections 5 (g), 5(l) and 5(m) read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (commonly referred as- “POCSO Act”) and Section 3(2)(v) of the Schedule Caste & Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short- “SC/ST (PA) Act”) and by virtue of Section 42 of the POCSO Act and Section 71 of IPC, sentenced the appellants with imprisonment for life i.e. imprisonment for remainder of their natural life and fine of Rs.20,000/- with default stipulation and also sentenced under Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (PA) Act for life imprisonment and fine of Rs.20,000/- with default stipulation.

2. Three others being child in conflict with law have been tried as adult by the Children’s Court in Special Case No.01/2022 as per the provisions of Section 18(3) and 19(1) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (for brevity- “JJ Act”) and they have also been convicted and sentenced similarly. The appeals filed by them are heard and being decided separately in view of the provision of Section 23 of the JJ Act. One another child in conflict with law was dealt with by Juvenile Justice Board,. Since, as per prosecution case all have been involved in the present case, therefore, there names shall be mentioned herein acronym, as 'ST', 'SD', 'DB' and the 'Juvenile'.

3. The encapsulated facts necessary to reach a decisive conclusion are that on 24.01.2021 the prosecutrix, aged 11 years and 6 months submitted a written complaint (Ex.P-2) to the SHO of Police Station Vindhyanagar District Singrauli stating that in the month of December, 2019 she used to go for tuition during which friendship took place with DB, who had made an obscene video of the prosecutrix and thereafter the DB along with other ST, SD, appellants Shivankar Sharma and Rahul Soni @ Golu and the Juvenile started black-mailing her and threatened her that they will make her obscene video viral, and on that pretext the they compelled her to come to the MIG Colony, Marriage Hall. It is further stated that one day in December, 2019 when she was coming back from the tuition at about 6:30 in the evening, the SD asked her that what your brother is doing inside the boundary of MIG Colony, Marriage Hall and when she went inside along with him where all other were already present and they all compelled the prosecutrix for physical relationship and they all one-by-one violated the privacy of the prosecutrix and they repeated this obscene activity till the end of December. It is stated that due to fear of ignominy, she did not disclose this incident at her home, however after few days all these persons again pressurized her and tried to compel her to come to the MIG Colony, Marriage Hall for making physical relationship. They also used filthy language denoting her caste. Under these circumstances on 23.01.2021 at about 9 O’clock the prosecutrix tried to commit suicide on the terrace of her house where her mother had seen the prosecutrix and thereafter the mother of the prosecutrix and other members of the family counselled the prosecutrix, then she narrated the entire incident to her parents and family members. The prosecutrix along with her parents went to the concerned police station and submitted a written complaint (Ex.P-2).

4. On the basis of the said written complaint (Ex.P-2), an FIR (Ex.P-3) vide Crime No.73/2021 for the offence under Sections 376, 376(2)(n), 376D, 376DA, 354C of IPC, Sections 5 /6, 11, 12, 13 and 14 of POCSO, Act and Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(1)(w)(i) of SC/ST (PA) Act has been registered at Police Station Vindhyanagar District Singrauli. The matter was investigate

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(MP) 731

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
VIVEK AGARWAL, RAMKUMAR CHOUBEY, JJ.
Rahul Soni @ Golu - Appellant
Versus
State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.7621 of 2023, Criminal Appeal No.7624 of 2023
Decided On : 06-01-2026

Conviction based on sole prosecutrix testimony requires the witness to be "sterling"—consistent and unassailable. If the testimony is contradicted by medical, forensic, or electronic evidence, or is improbable, corroboration is essential to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Legal Category Hierarchy

Table of Contents

4. Can a conviction for a sexual offence be based solely on the uncorroborated testimony of the prosecutrix?

5. How do material inconsistencies and lack of electronic evidence affect the prosecutrix's credibility?

6. What is the evidentiary significance of medical and forensic findings in a repeated gang rape case?

7. How is the victim's age proved for application of POCSO and the sixthly clause of Section 375 IPC?

8. What evidence establishes applicability of the SC/ST (PA) Act?

Judicial Analysis

2026 Supreme(MP) 731

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPURVIVEK AGARWAL, RAMKUMAR CHOUBEY, JJ.Rahul Soni @ Golu - AppellantVersusState Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent Criminal Appeal No.7621 of 2023, Criminal Appeal No.7624 of 2023Decided On : 06-01-2026

Conviction based on sole prosecutrix testimony requires the witness to be "sterling"—consistent and unassailable. If the testimony is contradicted by medical, forensic, or electronic evidence, or is improbable, corroboration is essential to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Legal Category Hierarchy

Table of Contents

4. Can a conviction for a sexual offence be based solely on the uncorroborated testimony of the prosecutrix?

5. How do material inconsistencies and lack of electronic evidence affect the prosecutrix's credibility?

6. What is the evidentiary significance of medical and forensic findings in a repeated gang rape case?

7. How is the victim's age proved for application of POCSO and the sixthly clause of Section 375 IPC?

8. What evidence establishes applicability of the SC/ST (PA) Act?

Cases Referred (7)

Judicial Analysis

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
VIVEK AGARWAL, RAMKUMAR CHOUBEY, JJ.
Rahul Soni @ Golu - Appellant
Versus
State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.7621 of 2023, Criminal Appeal No.7624 of 2023
Decided On : 06-01-2026