Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 14401

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

2026:CGHC:18918-DB

CRA No. 848 of 2025

Dikeshwar Yadav @ DK S/o Satyanarayan Yadav Aged About 24 Years R/o Village - Ghontey, P.S. Gobra Nawapara, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
... Appellant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Gobra Nawapara (Wrongly Mentioned Urla In The Cause Title Of The Impugned Judgment), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
... Respondent

For Appellant : Mr. Akash Deep Sharma, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Deputy Government Advocate.

Hon’ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Hon’ble Mr. Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge

24/04/2026

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Akash Deep Sharma
For the Respondents: Nitansh Jaiswal

In the absence of conclusive statutory proof, age determination cannot rely solely on school records unless the entry's source is verified. Furthermore, a conviction for sexual offences is unsustainable if the prosecution fails to negate consent or demonstrate coercion beyond reasonable doubt.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 313, 366, 376 - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Sections 4, 6 - Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 415(2) - Conviction for sexual offences - Age determination of victim - Proof of minority - Prosecution failed to produce clinching evidence regarding date of birth or age - School records without supporting evidence of how age was recorded lack evidentiary value - Relationship found to be consensual as victim failed to protest or complain despite opportunities - Burden of proof not discharged by prosecution. (Paras 12, 15, 23, 30)

(B) Evidence - Admissibility - Entry regarding date of birth in school register - Lacks evidentiary value in absence of material on which age was recorded - Testimony of victim - Consensual physical relationship - Absence of force or coercion - Prosecution failed to prove charges beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 19, 21, 26, 31)

Facts of the case:
An appeal was filed against a conviction under provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. The prosecution alleged that the appellant had sexual relations with the victim on the pretext of marriage. The victim, who was claimed to be a minor, lodged a complaint after discovering the appellant intended to marry another woman. The trial court convicted the appellant, relying on school records for age determination.

Findings of Court:
The Court held that the prosecution could not conclusively prove the victim was a minor. The school documentation was not supported by evidence regarding the origin of the recorded date of birth. Furthermore, the evidence indicated a consensual relationship rather than a forceful one, as the victim had multiple opportunities to report the matter but only complained upon learning of the appellant's intended marriage.

Issues: Whether the prosecution proved the minority of the victim and whether the findings of guilt recorded by the trial court were sustainable based on the evidence, particularly regarding the nature of the relationship and age determination.

Ratio Decidendi: Age determination in criminal cases requires strict adherence to evidence-based proof over unreliable school records; when a document lacks an explanation of its source, it cannot serve as sole proof of age. Furthermore, a conviction for sexual offences cannot stand when the prosecution fails to establish absence of consent and the victim’s testimony indicates a prolonged voluntary relationship.

Result: Appeal allowed; conviction and sentence set aside; appellant acquitted.

NAFR

Judgment on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

1. Heard Mr. Akash Deep Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, learned Deputy Government Advocate for the State/respondents.

2. Today, the matter is listed for hearing on IA No. 1, which is an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.

3. It is informed by Mr. Jaiswal, learned Deputy Government Advocate that the notice issued to the complainant/mother (PW-2) of the victim could not be served on account of the fact that she was not found on the address mentioned in the memo of appeal and it has been informed that the mother of the victim has gone somewhere for earning her livelihood. Hence, with the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, we proceed to her the matter finally on merits.

4. The appellant has filed this appeal under Section 415(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, the BNSS) questioning the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 06.03.2025 passed in Special Sessions Trial No. 93/2020, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and Second (POCSO) Fast Track Special Court, Raipur, District Raipur, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:

Conviction under Section	Jail Sentence (Rigorous)	Fine	Default Sentence
313 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, the IPC)	5 years	Rs. 3000/-	5 months R.I.
4(2) of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, the POCSO Act)	20 years	Rs. 3000/-	5 months R.I.
6 of POCSO Act	20 years	Rs. 3000/-	5 months R.I.

All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.

5. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the victim lodged a written complaint at Police Station Gobra Navapara stating that about four years prior to filing the report, in the year 2016, she had come to village-Ghot with her mother to work at making bricks at Pratap Welding Center. At that time, she was studying in Class 6 and used to go from village Ghot to Tari for schooling. During that period, the appellant DK @ Dikeshwar Yadav of village Ghot started following her from 02.07.2016, and on 02.07.2017, by saying that he would marry her, took her to his home, enticed her and came to her house and established physical relations with her. Thereafter, the appellant made physical relations with her multiple times continuously. During this period, in January 2019, she became pregnant. Then, in March 2019, the appellant brought pills and told her that if she did not take them, he would die, and said that they would not have a child now but would have one after attaining majority and marrying. Upon his insistence, she consumed the pills, due to which she had a miscarriage. In this way, the appellant continued to have physical relations with her until 18.11.2019. Thereafter, the appellant left her and thereafter denied to marry her.

6. On the basis of this written complaint (Exhibit P-1) of the informant, FIR (Exhibit P-02) was registered at Police Station Gobra Navapara against the accused under Sections 366, 376 of the IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. During investigation, the spot map (Exhibit P-3) and Patwari map (Exhibit P-4) were prepared. Regarding the date of birth of the victim, the certified copy of the school admission register (Exhibit P-08C), which mentions her date of birth, was seized as per seizure memo (Exhibit P-09). After obtaining consent from the victim and her mother vide Exhibit P-05 and Exhibit P-07 respectively, the victim was medically examined as per Exhibit P-12. Similarly, the appellant was also medically examined and the seized clothes were sent for examination as per Exhibit P-13 and Exhibit P-14. The underwear of the appellant was seized as per seizure memo (Exhibit P-16). The statement of the victim under Section 164 CrPC was recorded as per Exhibit P-06. The appellant was arrested and arrest memo (Exhibit P-20) was prepared. The seized exhibits were sen

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 14401

In the absence of conclusive statutory proof, age determination cannot rely solely on school records unless the entry's source is verified. Furthermore, a conviction for sexual offences is unsustainable if the prosecution fails to negate consent or demonstrate coercion beyond reasonable doubt.

Cases Referred (5)