Back
PATNA HIGH COURT
RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, SOURENDRA PANDEY, JJ
Banti Kumar Yadav @ Banti Yadav – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appellants convicted under ipc and pocso act. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. prosecution's case based on victim's fardbeyan. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. arguments presented by both parties. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. contradictions in the victim's statements. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 5. medical evidence contradicts victim's claims. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 23) |
| 6. need for reliable evidence in sexual assault cases. (Para 32 , 34) |
| 7. acquittal of the appellants due to prosecution's failure. (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43) |
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)
Date : 09-12-2025
Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned Amicus Curiae and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State in both the appeals. Despite service of notice upon the informant (Respondent No. 2) she has not entered appearance to oppose the appeal.
2. The present appeal arises out of the judgment of the conviction dated 25.11.2022 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘impugned judgment’) and the order of sentence dated 28.11.2022 (in short referred to as the ‘impugned order’) passed by the learned Exclusive Special Court (POCSO Act)-cum- 7th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur in
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
