Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 12210

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal, J
Mayank Thakur – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
CRA No. 505 of 2024

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Rishi Rahul Soni
For the Respondents: Amit Verma, Ramayan Yadav

A school register entry regarding date of birth lacks evidentiary value to prove a victim's minority in a criminal case unless the person who made the entry or the person who provided the specific date is examined, and in the absence of corroborative evidence, the benefit of doubt favors the accused.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - S. 363, 366, 376 - POCSO Act, 2012 - S. 4Juvenile Justice - Age determination - School register entry vs. birth certificate/affidavit - Onus of proof - Benefit of doubt - School register entry lacks evidentiary value without testimony of document creator or parent who provided date - Medical report and chemical analysis failed to establish sexual assault - Victim's conduct and lack of resistance indicated consent - Conviction set aside.

Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted for kidnapping and rape of a minor. The defense challenged the victim's age, claiming she was a consenting partner and that the prosecution failed to prove she was under 18. Evidence of the victim's age was based on a school register with overwriting, lacking documentation verifying the source of the date.

Findings of Court:
The prosecution failed to establish the victim's age as minor due to flaws in school record documentation and conflicting testimonies. The lack of injury marks, absence of semen/spermatozoa in the chemical report, and the victim's voluntary conduct suggested consent rather than force or kidnapping.

Issues: Whether the prosecution sufficiently proved the prosecutrix's minority and whether the incident involved non-consensual sexual activity.

Ratio Decidendi: Age records in school registers (like Dakhil Kharij) are inadmissible or carry no evidentiary value for proving minority unless the source of the information (the person who provided the date) is examined. In the absence of conclusive proof of minority and physical evidence of force/rape, benefit of doubt follows.

Result: Appeal allowed; appellant acquitted.

Table of Content
1. case background and summary of conviction. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. appellate arguments concerning minority and consent. (Para 5 , 6)
3. age determination and evidentiary value of school records. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
4. assessing consent and failure of medical evidence. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20)
5. final acquittal based on benefit of doubt. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24)

Judgment On Board

1. Invoking criminal appellate jurisdiction of this Court under Section 374(2) of the CrPC, the sole appellant herein has preferred this criminal appeal calling in question legality, validity and correctness of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.02.2024 passed by learned Special Judge (FTSC) POCSO Act, Mungeli (C.G.), in Special Criminal Case No.10/2023, by which the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:-

Conviction	Sentence & Fine
U/s 363 of the IPC	RI for 5 years and to pay fine of ₹500/-; in default of payment of fine, SI for 2 months
U/s 366 of the IPC	RI for 5 years and to pay fine of ₹500/-; in default of payment of fine, SI for 2 months
U/s 4 of the POCSO Act as also U/s.376(1) of the IPC [However, in light of Section 42 of the POCSO Act, sentenced/punished only U/s 4 of the POCSO Act]	RI for 10 years and to pay fine of ₹1000/-; in default of payment of fine, SI for 2 months
All the sentences were directed to run concurrently

Prosecution story:-

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 13.02.2023, the victim's paternal uncle/complainant (PW-04) lodged a written report at the City Kotwali Police Station, Mungeli, stating that on 10.02.2023, at approximately 11:00 AM, his niece (the victim) had gone to the market to purchase goods. The accused, Mayank Thakur, forcibly seized her, threatened her with death, took her to his residence in Malhapara, and subjected her to forcible sexual intercourse; as a result, his niece (the victim) remains terrified and traumatized. The complainant became aware of the incident only on 13.02.2023, when the victim confided in him about the occurrence; consequently, he was unable to lodge an immediate report regarding the incident. Based on the complainant's written report (Exhibit P-07), a First Information Report (Exhibit P-08) regarding the incident was registered against the accused. Thereafter, the investigation was initiated and the victim underwent a medical examination. Statements of witnesses were recorded. Documents related to the victim's age verification were seized. After completion of the investigation, the charge sheet was filed.

3. During the course of trial, in order to bring home the offence, the prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses and exhibited 24 documents including Ex.C-1. Statement of the appellant was recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. in which he denied circumstances appearing against him in prosecution case, pleaded innocence and false implication. However, two defence witnesses have been examined by the Appellant in support of his case.

4. The learned Trial Court after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence available on record, acquitted the appellant of offence U/s 506 part II of IPC. However, convicted and sentenced him as mentioned in the opening paragraph of this judgment, against which the instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant questioning the legality, validity and correctness of the impugned judgment.

Submission of the Parties:-

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the victim (PW-1) was a consenting party with the accused/appellant. The prosecution has failed to prove through valid evidence that the victim was a minor and below 18 years of age at the time of alleged incident. In such a situation, the said offences cannot said to be proved. Hence, considering the above, it is prayed that the appeal may be allowed and the impugned judgment may be set aside and the accused/appellant may be acquitted of the charges levelled

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 12210

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPURSanjay Kumar Jaiswal, JMayank Thakur – AppellantVersusState Of Chhattisgarh – RespondentCRA No. 505 of 2024

Cases Referred (3)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal, J
Mayank Thakur – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
CRA No. 505 of 2024