2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 16288

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Ramesh Sinha, CJ, Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J
Vicky @ Sukhiram @ Idaki S/o Girdhari Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
CRA No. 1343 of 2025

School admission records, once duly proved, are conclusive proof of a child victim's age under the POCSO Act; consent of a minor is legally irrelevant and does not constitute a defence.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 415(2) - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 376(2)(n) - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Sections 2(d), 6, and 29 - Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 35 - Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 - Rule 12 - Determination of age of a minor - School records and admission register, duly proved, constitute reliable evidence for proving the age of a victim as a 'child' under the POCSO Act - In the absence of contrary evidence, such records are treated as conclusive proof - The medical evidence corroborating pregnancy and signs of sexual activity strengthens the prosecution case - The statutory presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act shifts the burden onto the accused to disprove guilt once foundational facts are established - Consent of a minor is legally irrelevant and cannot be a valid defence. (Paras 29-31, 33-36, 37, 38, 58, 59, 61, 62, 65, 66, 79, 81)

(B) Appeal - Scope of appellate interference - An appellate court does not lightly interfere with findings of fact recorded by a trial court unless such findings are manifestly erroneous, perverse, or wholly unsustainable on the evidence on record. (Para 85)

(C) Conviction can be based on the sole testimony of a victim of sexual offence if it is trustworthy, credible, and of 'sterling quality' - The absence of the victim's testimony due to her demise does not weaken the prosecution case if the remaining evidence forms a complete and unbroken chain pointing toward the guilt of the accused. (Paras 48, 86, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 96)

Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted under Section 376(2)(n) IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act for repeatedly establishing physical relations with a minor victim on the false promise of marriage, resulting in her pregnancy and the birth of a female child. During the pendency of the trial, the victim and her minor daughter were murdered, for which the appellant was separately convicted. The victim was thus unavailable for examination.

Findings of Court:
The court affirmed the conviction and life sentence, holding that the prosecution had successfully proved that the victim was below 18 years on the date of the incident through school records (admission register and mark-sheet), medical evidence confirming pregnancy, and the consistent testimony of the victim's parents (PWs-1 and 2). The court found that the statutory presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act was attracted and the appellant failed to rebut it. The defence of consent was held irrelevant due to the victim's minority.

Issues: The main issues were whether the victim was a 'child' under the POCSO Act (below 18 years) at the time of the incident; whether the appellant committed repeated penetrative sexual assault on the victim; and whether the conviction and sentence were sustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the school admission register and mark-sheet, duly proved by a competent witness (the Headmaster), constitute reliable and admissible evidence for determining the age of the victim. When such documentary evidence is consistent with the FIR, medical reports, and oral testimony, it conclusively proves minority. Once minority is established, the consent of the victim is immaterial in law, and the statutory presumption of guilt under Section 29 of the POCSO Act shifts the burden of proof onto the accused, which the appellant failed to discharge. The court also held that the death of the victim does not weaken the prosecution if the remaining evidence, including testimony of parents and medical/scientific evidence, forms a complete chain of circumstances pointing to the guilt of the accused. Result : Appeal dismissed.

Issues: The main issues were whether the victim was a 'child' under the POCSO Act (below 18 years) at the time of the incident; whether the appellant committed repeated penetrative sexual assault on the victim; and whether the conviction and sentence were sustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the school admission register and mark-sheet, duly proved by a competent witness (the Headmaster), constitute reliable and admissible evidence for determining the age of the victim. When such documentary evidence is consistent with the FIR, medical reports, and oral testimony, it conclusively proves minority. Once minority is established, the consent of the victim is immaterial in law, and the statutory presumption of guilt under Section 29 of the POCSO Act shifts the burden of proof onto the accused, which the appellant failed to discharge. The court also held that the death of the victim does not weaken the prosecution if the remaining evidence, including testimony of parents and medical/scientific evidence, forms a complete chain of circumstances pointing to the guilt of the accused.

Result: Appeal dismissed. The judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 12.12.2024 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court (POCSO), Raipur in Special Sessions Case No.78/2019, is affirmed.

Findings of Court:
The court affirmed the conviction and life sentence, holding that the prosecution had successfully proved that the victim was below 18 years on the date of the incident through school records (admission register and mark-sheet), medical evidence confirming pregnancy, and the consistent testimony of the victim's parents (PWs-1 and 2). The court found that the statutory presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act was attracted and the appellant failed to rebut it. The defence of consent was held irrelevant due to the victim's minority.

Issues: The main issues were whether the victim was a 'child' under the POCSO Act (below 18 years) at the time of the incident; whether the appellant committed repeated penetrative sexual assault on the victim; and whether the conviction and sentence were sustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the school admission register and mark-sheet, duly proved by a competent witness (the Headmaster), constitute reliable and admissible evidence for determining the age of the victim. When such documentary evidence is consistent with the FIR, medical reports, and oral testimony, it conclusively proves minority. Once minority is established, the consent of the victim is immaterial in law, and the statutory presumption of guilt under Section 29 of the POCSO Act shifts the burden of proof onto the accused, which the appellant failed to discharge. The court also held that the death of the victim does not weaken the prosecution if the remaining evidence, including testimony of parents and medical/scientific evidence, forms a complete chain of circumstances pointing to the guilt of the accused. Result : Appeal dismissed.

Issues: The main issues were whether the victim was a 'child' under the POCSO Act (below 18 years) at the time of the incident; whether the appellant committed repeated penetrative sexual assault on the victim; and whether the conviction and sentence were sustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the school admission register and mark-sheet, duly proved by a competent witness (the Headmaster), constitute reliable and admissible evidence for determining the age of the victim. When such documentary evidence is consistent with the FIR, medical reports, and oral testimony, it conclusively proves minority. Once minority is established, the consent of the victim is immaterial in law, and the statutory presumption of guilt under Section 29 of the POCSO Act shifts the burden of proof onto the accused, which the appellant failed to discharge. The court also held that the death of the victim does not weaken the prosecution if the remaining evidence, including testimony of parents and medical/scientific evidence, forms a complete chain of circumstances pointing to the guilt of the accused.

Result: Appeal dismissed. The judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 12.12.2024 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court (POCSO), Raipur in Special Sessions Case No.78/2019, is affirmed.