The prosecution must definitively establish foundational facts in POCSO cases to uphold a conviction; mere testimony of a child without corroboration is insufficient.

CAV JUDGMENT

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY)

Date : 25-11-2025

Heard Mr. Md. Irshad, learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant and Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha, learned APP for the State. We find that the notice was sent to respondent no. 2 and the same was received by father of the victim/husband of the informant and, therefore, was taken as validly served by the order dated 04.11.2025 of this Court, however, despite valid service of notice nobody appears on behalf of respondent no.2.

2. The present appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction dated 09.11.2022 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘impugned judgment’) and the order of sentence dated 15.11.2022 (in short referred to as the ‘impugned order’) passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Spl. Judge POCSO, Patna in connection with Special (POCSO) Case No. 150 of 2020, arising out of Sachivalaya P.S. Case No. 89 of 2020.

3. By the impugned judgment the appellant namely Jai Krishna Yadav has been convicted for the offences under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short referred to as the ‘POCSO Act’) and has been sentenced to undergo 20 years S.I. for the offence under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and to pay a fine of Rs. 25,000/-. In default of payment of fine to further undergo S.I. for 6 months.

Prosecution Case:

4. The prosecution case is based on the written application dated 24.08.2020 given by the informant/mother of the victim (P.W. 3). In her written report, she has stated that on 24.08.2020 at about 12:30 P.M., she woke up from her sleep after hearing her daughter crying. It is alleged that when she asked her about the reason for her crying, she disclosed that when she was playing with Ankit near the vehicle, Krishna uncle took her forcibly on his lap to his room, closed the door and started inserting his penis inside her anus. The minor daughter of the informant started yelling with pain upon which the accused scolded her to remain silent and started rubbing his penis on her anus. It is further alleged that she started shouting for her parents and somehow fled away to her house after shrugging from the hold of the accused and wearing her pant. It is further alleged that when the informant checked, she found that the anus of her daughter was wounded with scratches. It is further alleged that accused lives in the room in the north of the quarter of the informant and was posted as Homeguard in the official residence of Anjani Kumar Singh, Ex-Chief Secretary. It is alleged that the informant scolded the accused and told about the entire incident to her husband.

5. On the basis of the aforesaid written application, Sachivalaya P.S. Case No. 89 of 2020 dated 24.08.2020 under Section 376 of the IPC and Sections 8, 12 of the POCSO Act.

6. After completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer (I.O.) submitted charge-sheet being Charge-Sheet No. 92 of 2020 dated 12.11.2020 under Section 376 of the IPC and Sections 4, 6 of the POCSO Act.

7. On the basis of the police report, cognizance was taken vide order dated 03.04.2021 under Section 376-AB of the IPC and Sections 4, 6 of the POCSO Act against the accused/appellant Jai Krishna Yadav.

8. Charges were read over and explained to the appellant/Jai Krishna Yadav in Hindi to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

9. In course of trial, the prosecution examined as many