Form No. J(1)

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Present :

The Hon’ble Justice Rajasekhar Mantha

And

The Hon’ble Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta

C.R.A. 207 of 2018

Santosh Srivastava @ Manu Srivastava

Versus

The State of West Bengal and another

For the Appellant: Mr. Sabir Ahmed,

Mr. Ayan Chakraborty, Ms. Sohini Mukherjee,

Mr. Saikat Mallick

For the State: Ms. Rituparna Ghosh,

Ms. Afreen Begum.

For the Victim: Mr. Shounak Mondal.

Heard on: 09.12.2025. Judgment on: 09.12.2025.

Rajasekhar Mantha, J.:

1. The subject appeal is directed against judgment and order of conviction dated 14.03.2018 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, First Court at Sealdah, South 24 Parganas-cum-Special Judge under POCSO Act, 2012 in Special Case No. 12 of 2017. The appellant

was convicted under Section 376 of the IPC and 6 of the POCSO Act.

2. The appellant was sentenced to life imprisonment and was directed to pay a fine of Rs 2,00,000 (two lakhs). 90% of the said amount was directed to

be paid to the victim as compensation in terms of section 357 of the CRPC. Upon the default thereof, the appellant was directed to further undergo a rigorous imprisonment for one year. The detention period already suffered by the appellant was directed to set off in terms of Section 428, CRPC.

THE PROSECUTION CASE:

3. The victim and the appellant were allegedly having a love affair for more than three years prior to the date of lodging of the complaint with the police i.e. 16th March 2017. In course of such love affair, the appellant on several occasions entered into sexual intercourse with the victim. The victim initially protested against the said intercourse. However, she acquiesced when the appellant assured her that he would marry her. The victim was a minor aged 15 years 4 months on the date of the lodging of the police complaint. The victim, therefore, was about 12 years at the inception of the love affair with the appellant.

4. The complaint of the victim resulted in FIR No. 60 dated 16.03.2017 under Section 6 of the POSCO Act, 2015 and 376 of the IPC of the Narkeldanga Police Station against the appellant. The complaint was filed when the victim became pregnant and the family members of the victim confronted the appellant and his family with the fact that the appellant had impregnated the victim minor girl. However, the family of the appellant denied his involvement

5. As per the complaint, the appellant had sexual intercourse for the first time with the victim around 8:30 PM in November, 2016 in his house. The family members of the appellant were not in the house on that day. The victim at that time aged about 14 odd years of age. Hence the same amounted to an aggravated penetrative sexual assault, defined under the 5(j)/(ii) and 5(l) of the POSCO Act; the punishment whereof is prescribed under section 6 of the POSCO Act read Section 376 of the IPC.

6. The Statement of the victim under Section 164 CRPC indicates that the appellant used to buy her food from time to time and accordingly won her over. After November 2016 the appellant had sexual intercourse with the victim many times thereafter.

7. Admittedly the victim’s father was a rickshaw van puller and her mother worked as a housemaid. The victim came from a poor family. The appellant was slightly better off than the victim’s family.

8. The last of such penetrative sexual assault occurred by the appellant with the victim occurred in February, 2017 in a hotel at central Kolkata. When the victim discovered that she became pregnant, she told the appellant who ignored the same. When she fell sick at home, she informed her parents. Her pregnancy was confirmed after a medical test performed at home.

9. The appellant was taken into custody and charges were framed by the trial Court on 31.08.2017 under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. The charge under Section 6 was based on the fact that the appellant committed the offence of aggravating penetrating sexual assau