IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL

&

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAMKUMAR CHOUBEY

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.7621 OF 2023

RAHUL SONI @ GOLU

Vs.

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.7624 OF 2023

SHIVANKAR SHARMA

Vs.

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appearance:

Shri Vivek Shukla, Advocate for the appellant in CRA No.7621/2023, Shri Satyendra Singh Tiwari & Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Advocates for the

appellant in CRA No.7624/2023.

Shri Manas Mani Verma, Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reserved on : 17.11.2025 Pronounced on : 06.01.2026

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

JUDGMENT

Per: Justice Ramkumar Choubey:

The appellants have preferred these appeals under Section 374 of

Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the impugned judgment dated 7.3.2023 passed in

Special Case No.30/202 by the Special Judge, Waidhan, District Singrauli where by convicted the appellants for the offences under Sections 376(3), 376(2)(n), 376AB and 376DB of IPC, under Sections 5(g), 5(l) and 5(m) read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (commonly referred as- “POCSO Act”) and Section 3(2)(v) of the Schedule Caste & Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short- “SC/ST (PA) Act”) and by virtue of Section 42 of the POCSO Act and Section 71 of IPC, sentenced the appellants with imprisonment for life i.e. imprisonment for remainder of their natural life and fine of Rs.20,000/- with default stipulation and also sentenced under Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (PA) Act for life imprisonment and fine of Rs.20,000/- with default stipulation.

2. Three others being child in conflict with law have been tried as adult by the Children’s Court in Special Case No.01/2022 as per the provisions of Section 18(3) and 19(1) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (for brevity- “JJ Act”) and they have also been convicted and sentenced similarly. The appeals filed by them are heard and being decided separately in view of the provision of Section 23 of the JJ Act. One another child in conflict with law was dealt with by Juvenile Justice Board,. Since, as per prosecution case all have been involved in the present case, therefore, there names shall be mentioned herein acronym, as 'ST', 'SD', 'DB' and the 'Juvenile'.

3. The encapsulated facts necessary to reach a decisive conclusion are that on 24.01.2021 the prosecutrix, aged 11 years and 6 months submitted a written complaint (Ex.P-2) to the SHO of Police Station Vindhyanagar District Singrauli stating that in the month of December, 2019 she used to go for tuition during which friendship took place with DB, who had made an obscene video of the prosecutrix and thereafter the DB along with other ST, SD, appellants Shivankar Sharma and Rahul Soni @ Golu and the Juvenile started black-mailing her and threatened her that they will make her obscene video viral, and on that pretext the they compelled her to come to the MIG Colony, Marriage Hall. It is further stated that one day in December, 2019 when she was coming back from the tuition at about 6:30 in the evening, the SD asked her that what your brother is doing inside the boundary of MIG Colony, Marriage Hall and when she went inside along with him where all other were already present and they all compelled the prosecutrix for physical relationship and they all one-by-one violated the privacy of the prosecutrix and they repeated this obscene activity till the end of December. It is stated that due to fear of ignominy, she did not disclose this incident at her home, however after few days all these persons again pressurized her and tried to compel her to come to the MIG Colony, Marriage Hall for making physical relationship. They also used f