Back
PATNA HIGH COURT
Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, Sourendra Pandey, JJ
Niranjan Bhardwaj @ Raju – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conviction details and sentencing. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. factual background of the case. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. trial court's findings on evidence. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. defence arguments regarding victim's age. (Para 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 5. prosecution's rebuttal on age and responsibility. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 6. legal standards for assessing victim age. (Para 22 , 23 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 7. court's evaluation of evidence. (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 37) |
| 8. conclusion and dismissal of the appeal. (Para 39 , 40) |
JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)
Date : 17-12-2025
Heard Mr. Manoj Kumar No. 1, learned Amicus Curiae on behalf of the appellant, Mr. Rahul Kumar, learned counsel for the informant and Mr. Manish Kumar No. 2, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The present appeal has been preferred for setting aside of the judgment of conviction dated 06.02.2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘impugned judgment’) and the order of sentence dated 10.02.2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘impugned order’) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, VI-cum-Special Judge, POCSO Act, Muzaffarpur in POCSO G.R. No. 01 of 2021 arising out
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
