Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(J&K) 314

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Sanjay Dhar, J
YAWAR AHMAD BHAGAT – Appellant
Versus
UNION TERRITORY THROUGH POLICE STATION YARIPORA (HOME) – Respondent
CrlA(S) 3 / 2025

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Zahid Hussain, Bhat Shafi, Zahid Afzal, Naveed Bukhtiyar
For the Respondents: Zahid Qais Noor

For conviction of statutory rape, prosecution must prove age of prosecutrix beyond reasonable doubt. School leaving certificate without proof of its basis has no probative value. Consensual relationship with an adult cannot constitute rape.

Headnote:(A) Ranbir Penal Code - Sections 363, 376, 109 - Jammu & Kashmir Code of Criminal Procedure - Sections 161, 164A, 342 - Evidence Act - Principles relating to proof of age - Minor’s consent in rape cases - Consensual relationship between teenagers.

(B) Age of prosecutrix - School leaving certificate has no probative value unless basis of entry is proved - Entries in school register are admissible but not conclusive - Burden on prosecution to prove minority beyond reasonable doubt - Failure to examine father or sister about exact date of birth - Statement of prosecutrix acknowledging consensual physical relationship - In absence of proof of minority, consent is relevant - Relationship out of free will and volition cannot be termed rape - Courts must avoid perversity of justice in teenage consensual relationships. (Paras 18-31)

Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted under Section 376 RPC for allegedly committing statutory rape on a girl who was claimed to be a minor. The prosecutrix had accompanied the appellant voluntarily and admitted having physical relations with him out of her own free will. The prosecution relied on a school leaving certificate (EXTPW-7) and oral testimony of father and sister to prove her age below 18 years. The trial court convicted the appellant on the basis of the said certificate, holding consent immaterial due to minority.

Findings of Court:
The High Court found that the school leaving certificate had no probative value as the teacher who produced it could not state the basis on which the date of birth was recorded. The father and sister of the prosecutrix were unable to give her date of birth. Thus, the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the prosecutrix was a minor at the time of occurrence. Since the prosecutrix herself admitted consensual physical relations, the conviction for rape could not stand. The appeal was allowed and the conviction set aside.

Issues: 1. Whether the age of the prosecutrix was proved beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution? 2. Whether the conviction for statutory rape under Section 376 RPC was sustainable in the absence of proof of minority and in view of consensual relationship?

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the entry in the school register regarding date of birth is not conclusive proof of age; the prosecution must establish the basis of such entry. Since no reliable evidence of minority was presented, the prosecutrix must be presumed to be an adult. Consequently, her consent made the sexual act not rape. Moreover, in cases of consensual teenage relationships, courts should exercise discretion to avoid injustice.

Result: Appeal allowed. Impugned judgment of conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant directed to be released from custody forthwith if not required in any other case.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR Reserved on: 09.04.2026 Pronounced on:24.04.2026 Uploaded on: 24.04.2026 Whether the operative part or full judgment is pronounced: Full CrlA(S) No.03/2025 YAWAR AHMAD BHAGAT ...APPELLANT(S)

Through: - Mr. Zahid Hussain, Advocate, with M/S: Bhat Shafi, Zahid Afzal and Naveed Bukhtiyar, Advocates.

Vs.

UT OF J&K THROUGH P/S YARIPORA …RESPONDENT(S)

Through: - Mr. Zahid Qais Noor, GA.

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE

JUDGMENT

1) The appellant has challenged judgment dated 12.03.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Kulgam (hereinafter referred to as “the trial court”), whereby he has been convicted for offence under Section 376 RPC. Challenge has also been thrown to order dated 14.03.2025, passed by the trial court, whereby the appellant has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of eight years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/ for commission of offence under Section 376 RPC. In default of payment of fine, the appellant has been directed to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months.

2) Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that on 07.12.2018, Police Station, Yaripora received a written report from PW-1 Abdul Aziz Dar, alleging therein that his daughter, Ms. X, had left home at about 5 p.m. on the previous day in connection with making purchases from the market but in the meanwhile she was kidnapped by the appellant/accused. It was further reported that despite making strenuous efforts to locate the prosecutrix, her whereabouts could not be traced.

3) On the basis of aforesaid report of PW-1, FIR No.92/2018 for offences under Section 363, 109 RPC came to be registered at Police Station, Yaripora, and investigation was set into motion. During the course of investigation, the police recovered the prosecutrix from custody of the appellant from a place named Shirpora Dal. The prosecutrix was subjected to medical checkup and after obtaining the medical opinion, offence under Section 376 was added. The statement of the prosecutrix under Section 161 of Cr. P. C and under Section 164A of Cr. P. C was recorded during the course of investigation and the statements of other witnesses acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case were also recorded. It was found that co-accused Shabir Ahmad Bhagat and Ghulam Mohi-ud-din Bhagat had aided and assisted the appellant in commission of the crime. The date of birth certificate of the prosecutrix was obtained from the school where she had studied and her age was found to be less than 18 years. It was also found that the prosecutrix was pregnant carrying a foetus of 36 weeks. After investigation of the case, offences under Section 363/376 RPC were found established against the appellant and the challan against him as well as against co-accused was laid before the trial court.

4) On 23.07.2019, charges for offences under Section 363, 376 RPC were framed against the appellant and his plea was recorded. The appellant denied the charges and claimed to be tried. Accordingly, the prosecution was directed to adduce evidence in support of its case.

5) In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined as many as 11 out of 12 witnesses cited in the challan. Besides examining the prosecutrix, the other material witnesses who were examined by the prosecution included father of the prosecutrix, PW-1 Abdul Aziz Dar, PW-2 Mohammad Ayoub Allie, PW-3 Mohammad Yousuf Dar, PW-4 Lali Jan (elder sister of the prosecutrix), PW-5 Constable Zahoor Ahmad, PW-6 Constable Irshad Ahmad, PW-7 Muzaffar Ahmad Paul, Teacher Govt. High School Kujjar, PW-8 Mst. Rani Mehak, PW-9 Dr. Shabeena Medical Officer, PW-10 Dr. Rafia Medical Officer and PW-12 Inspector Ather Samad, the Investigating Officer.

6) After completion of the prosecution evidence, the statement of the appellant and co-accused under Section 342 of J&K Cr. P. C were recorded on 03.02.2024. In his statement the appellant denied hav

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(J&K) 314

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIRSanjay Dhar, JYAWAR AHMAD BHAGAT – AppellantVersusUNION TERRITORY THROUGH POLICE STATION YARIPORA (HOME) – RespondentCrlA(S) 3 / 2025

For conviction of statutory rape, prosecution must prove age of prosecutrix beyond reasonable doubt. School leaving certificate without proof of its basis has no probative value. Consensual relationship with an adult cannot constitute rape.

Cases Referred (1)

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Sanjay Dhar, J
YAWAR AHMAD BHAGAT – Appellant
Versus
UNION TERRITORY THROUGH POLICE STATION YARIPORA (HOME) – Respondent
CrlA(S) 3 / 2025