School register entries are admissible under Section 35 of the Evidence Act but have limited probative value to prove age unless the source of information is corroborated. Where evidence is contradictory and medical/forensic findings are negative, the benefit of doubt regarding consent and age must favor the accused.

1. Heard Mr. Aishwarya Kumar Dubey learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the appellant as well as Mr. Malay Jain, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing on behalf of the State/respondent.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.07.2024 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhatapara, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh in Special Criminal Case No.03/2024 whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “IPC”) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, ‘POCSO Act’) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 03 years and fine of Rs.100/-, in default of payment of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment for 10 days, rigorous imprisonment for 05 years and fine of Rs.100/-, in default of payment of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment for 10 days and rigorous imprisonment for 20 years and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, additional rigorous imprisonment for 50 days, respectively and it was further directed to run all the sentences concurrently.

3. Learned State counsel submits that notice issued to PW-1 mother of the victim has been served, but none has appeared on behalf of the victim to contest the present appeal.

4. The prosecution case, briefly stated, is that the mother of the victim (PW-1) lodged an oral report at Police Station Hathband, stating that her daughter, aged 17 years, 5 months, and 27 days, had left home at about 09:40 AM on 28.11.2023 for school but did not return. Acting on this information, Missing Person Report No. 23/2023 was registered, and investigation commenced. Prima facie, considering that the victim was a minor and suspecting that an unknown person had enticed and taken her away, the police concluded that an offence under Section 363 IPC was made out. Accordingly, and in compliance with the prior directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, a case under Section 363 IPC was registered.

5. During the course of investigation, the victim was recovered on 24.12.2023 from Nagnor, within the jurisdiction of Kamwai Police Station, District Yadgiri, Karnataka vide recovery panchnama (Ex.P/2). Her statement was recorded, wherein she disclosed that accused Dhiraj Banjare had enticed her and taken her to Bamhanmudi, where she was made to stay in a separate room and where the accused, despite her refusal, subjected her to sexual intercourse. The victim further stated that on 29.11.2023, accused Dhiraj Banjare, along with his maternal uncle, co-accused Ubaran Das, visited Giroudpuri and thereafter took her to Pandariya. From there, they boarded a train via Bilaspur to Gondia and subsequently travelled to Secunderabad. They then proceeded by bus to Nagnor (Kamwai Police Station, District Yadgiri, Karnataka), where she was confined in an old building situated near a hospital. The victim told co-accused Ubaran Das that she wanted to return home, but he allegedly stated that she would not be allowed to return until she bore a child. She remained confined there for 23–24 days, during which the accused Dhiraj Banjare repeatedly subjected her to sexual intercourse against her will. On 24.12.2023, the victim’s mother and uncle reached the place along with the Hathband police. The victim returned with them to Hathband. She was formally recovered at about 20:00 hours on 24.12.2023, and her statement was recorded. On the basis of her statement, offences under Sections 366, 376, 368 and 34 IPC, along with Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act, were added.

6. The clothes worn by the victim and the a