IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SMT.JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA Date: 28.11.2025 Between:

Arun Jadav … Appellant/Accused And State of Telangana, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad ... Respondent THE HON’BLE SMT.JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA

JUDGMENT:

This Criminal Appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 29.09.2025 passed by the Special Judge for trial of cases under POCSO cum IX Additional District and Sessions Judge, (FTC), Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar in S.C. No.681 of

2017.

2. Heard Sri Sushil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant-accused and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the de facto complainant and her family were living at Hyderabad and the accused was residing in their neighbourhood. LW.3 is her husband and LW.2- victim is their daughter. LWs.1 and 3 used to attend to their respective works daily by leaving the victim at home. While so, the accused developed acquaintance with LW.2, the alleged victim. On 31.01.2017 at 9.00 hours, the mother of the victim went to Chamki Company for her routine work by leaving LW.2 at the house. At around 10.45 hours on the same day, the accused took LW.2 forcibly into his room and laid her on the mat and later he slowly touched her vagina with finger by removing her pant and tried to assault her sexually. Luckily in the meantime, LW.1 came to the house and found that her daughter was not in the house and she called her aloud. On hearing the same, the accused left the victim and threatened her not to disclose the same to anyone. When the victim came out of the room of the accused, her mother questioned her then the victim told her about the acts of the accused. In the meantime, the accused fled away from the house/room. On the same day at about 11.30 am, the mother of the victim lodged a report with the police Dundigal. Based on the said report, the police registered a case in Crime No. 92 of 2017 for the offences under Sections 376 IPC and 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act against the accused and visited the scene of offence, recorded the statements of witnesses. The Investigating Officer conducted the scene of offence panchanama in the presence of two mediators and referred the victim girl to Gandhi Hospital Secunderabad for medical examination and seized smears, vaginal swabs etc., and sent them to FSL for examination. He also seized the clothes of the victim under a seizure report in the presence of two mediators and got recorded the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. On the same day, the police apprehended the accused at his residence at 7.00 pm, recorded his confessional statement and seized the underwear of the accused. After completion of investigation, the police filed charge sheet against the accused for the above said offences and a case in SC No.681 of 2017 was registered against the accused. The copies were supplied to the accused and on hearing the learned Special Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the accused, charges under Section 376 IPC and 5(m) read with Section 6 of the POCSO act were framed against the accused, read over and explained to him, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

3.1. During the curse of trial, the prosecution has examined PWs.1 to 10 and got marked Exs.P1 to P9 and MOs.1 to 3.

3.2. Considering the evidence on record, the trial court has convicted the accused for the offences under Section 376(1) IPC and Section 5(m) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, by imposing a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 5(m) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act. Challenging the said judgment of conviction and sentence, the present appeal is filed by the accused.

4. Learned counsel for the app