Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 8812

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Ramesh Sinha, CJ, Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J
Rakesh Sahu – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
CRA No. 484 of 2024

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Vaibhav Shukla
For the Respondents: Saumya Rai

The testimony of a victim of sexual assault, especially one involving a minor or a vulnerable person, is vital and sufficient for conviction without requiring corroboration, provided it inspires confidence, as penetration to any extent regardless of medical findings of injury is sufficient to constitute the offence of rape.

Headnote:(A) Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Section 6 - Rape - Aggravated penetrative sexual assault - Minor with mental disability - Determination of age - Birth registration record given primacy over medical opinion for age determination of minor - Held, statutory record from school or birth registrar is the preferred document under Section 94(2) of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. (Paras 10, 12, 13)

(B) Evidence - Testimony of victim of sexual assault - Corroboration - Medical evidence - Penetration - Hymen intactness - Absence of spermatozoa - Held, testimony of victim of sexual assault is vital and can be acted upon without corroboration if it inspires confidence - Penetration to any extent is sufficient to constitute rape, and lack of internal/external physical injury does not negate the offence, especially where victim is mentally and physically disabled. (Paras 14, 15, 19, 21)

(C) Appeal - Sentencing - Life imprisonment - Enhancement of sentence - Consideration of dignity and human rights of the victim - Held, reduction of sentence for rape against a minor, especially one with disabilities, would be an anathema to the rule of law. (Para 22)

Facts of the case:
The Appellant was convicted for the rape of a girl with 50% mental and physical disability. The victim, who was speech-impaired, gestured that the appellant had taken her to a secluded spot and committed sexual assault. Age was determined by the trial court as 16 years and 4 months based on birth registration records. Conviction was challenged citing contradictory medical evidence (intact hymen) and lack of forensic evidence (no spermatozoa).

Findings of Court:
Evidence of the victim, interpreted by special educators and corroborated by family members who observed her distressed state immediately after the incident, is sufficient for conviction despite negative FSL reports and medical findings.

Issues: Whether the conviction is sustainable based on the testimony of a disabled victim without forensic support, and whether the age determination was correct.

Ratio Decidendi: Testimony of a sexual assault victim, particularly a minor or vulnerable person, serves as sufficient basis for conviction if trustworthy, and seeking material corroboration as a rule is discouraged as it further victimizes the survivor.

Result: Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence confirmed.

Table of Content
1. overview of charges, prosecution case, and trial court proceedings. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. summary of rival contentions regarding evidence and witness testimony. (Para 6 , 7)
3. principles for forensic determination of age of a minor victim. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
4. court's approach to credibility of vulnerable victims and sufficiency of oral testimony. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21)
5. justification for quantum of sentence based on dignity and constitutional rights. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26)

Judgment on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

13/04/2026

1. This criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant against the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence dated 12.12.2023, passed by learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, FTSC (POCSO), Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.), in Special Session Case No. 23 of 2018, arising out of Crime No. 89 of 2018, registered at Police Station Mujgahan, District Raipur, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced in the following manner:

CONVICTION	SENTENCE
U/s 376(2)(l)/376(2) of IPC and u/s 5(k)/6 of the Protection of the Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012	Rigorous Imprisonment for life (imprisonment till natural death) and fine of amount of Rs. 2000/-, in default of payment of fine further one month imprisonment.

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, on 14.06.2018, the victim, who is a person with 50% mental and physical disability, went missing from her home around 06:00 PM. Her family members and villagers searched for her, and at approximately 09:00 PM, she was seen returning from the direction of the appellant’s house in a crying condition and was not wearing her pajamas. The victim, through gestures and signs, indicated that the appellant, Rakesh Sahu alias Lalu, had taken her to a secluded spot, closed her mouth, and committed sexual assault upon her. The written complaint was submitted by the sister of the victim (PW-01), based on which the FIR (Exhibit P-02) was registered at Police Station Mujgahan for the offence under Section 376 of the IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

During the investigation, the victim was sent for medical examination to District Hospital Raipur, where Dr. A. Dutta (PW-13) examined her and gave reports (Exhibits P-15 and P-16), noting an intact hymen and advising chemical analysis of the stains found on her underwear. The spot maps were prepared by the police (Exhibit P-19) and by the Patwari (Exhibit P-18), identifying the place of occurrence near the appellant's residence. With respect to the age and mental status of the victim, a disability certificate (Exhibit P-05) issued by the District Medical Board and a caste certificate (Exhibit P-06) were seized. To record the statement of the speech-impaired victim, experts from the Government School for Blind and Deaf, Raipur, including PW-04 and PW-09, were engaged. Her statement under Section 164 of CrPC (Exhibit P-10) was recorded before the Magistrate and was also video-recorded (Exhibit P-11).

The appellant was arrested on 18.02.2018 and was sent for medical examination to Dr. B.P. Chandrakar (PW-12), who found him fit for sexual intercourse vide report (Exhibit P-13). The seized articles, including the undergarments of the victim and the appellant, were sent to State FSL Raipur, from where the FSL report (Exhibit P-30) was received, indicating the presence of semen on the appellant's clothing but no human spermatozoa on the victim's slides or garments. After completion of the investigation, a charge sheet was filed before the learned Trial Court for the offences under Sections 376(2)(n), 376(3) of the IPC, Section 6 of the POCSO Act, and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act.

3. The learned trial Court framed charges against the appellant for the offences under Sections 376(2)(n), 376(3) of the IPC, Section 6 of the POCSO Act, and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act. The appellant denied the charges and claimed tri

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 8812

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPURRamesh Sinha, CJ, Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, JRakesh Sahu – AppellantVersusState Of Chhattisgarh – RespondentCRA No. 484 of 2024

Cases Referred (5)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Ramesh Sinha, CJ, Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J
Rakesh Sahu – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
CRA No. 484 of 2024