Back
'Even Partial Finger Penetration Counts': Sikkim HC Stands Firm on 20-Year POCSO Sentence for Assault on 5-Year-Old
In a stark reaffirmation of child protection laws, the has dismissed an appeal by 60-year-old Krishna Chettri, upholding his conviction for on a five-year-old girl. A Division Bench of Justices Meenakshi Madan Rai and Bhaskar Raj Pradhan confirmed the trial court's 20-year sentence under the , emphasizing that even minimal digital penetration qualifies as a grave offence.
From Village Road to Courtroom Horror
The nightmare unfolded on , near the victim's home in a landslide-prone area. The child, playing alone, was allegedly picked up by Chettri, who inserted his finger into her vagina—causing pain—and sniffed her private parts while pinning her legs. Eyewitness PW-4, the victim's aunt by marriage, caught the act red-handed: she saw Chettri lift the girl upside down, fondle her genitals, and attempt to pull her head toward his penis. She intervened twice, scolding him before rushing the distraught child home.
An FIR lodged the next day triggered a swift investigation under FIR No.39/2020. The trial court at the , convicted Chettri in after examining 14 witnesses, sentencing him to 20 years. He appealed, challenging the "penetrative" label.
Appellant's Plea: 'No Penetration, Just Touch'
Chettri's counsel didn't deny the assault or the victim's tender age but zeroed in on medical evidence. Arguing no penile involvement and injuries inconsistent with deep penetration, they sought downgrade to mere "sexual assault" under —slashing the sentence from 20 years to a minimum three. The medical report noted only external abrasions and a minor anal tear, they claimed, urging leniency.
Prosecution's Ironclad Case: Testimony Trumps All
The state countered fiercely, pointing to unshakeable evidence. The victim's courtroom testimony—with gestures pinpointing her vagina—was "cogent" despite her age. Corroborated by PW-4's vivid eyewitness account and the doctor's findings of
"reddish abrasion on the right side upper aspect of inner wall of labia minora"
and an anal tear, hinting at "fresh injury" and possible "sexual violence." The bench noted the prosecution proved its case "
."
Decoding POCSO: No Full Thrust Required
Drawing directly from , the court clarified: includes inserting "to
any extent
, any object or a part of the body, not being the penis, into the vagina.
"Aggravation under
applies to children below 12, with
mandating 20+ years."
It is not necessary that there has to be full penetration," the judges ruled, aligning with the victim's pain description, eyewitness fondling, and inner genital injuries.
IPC charges under were subsumed via , as the Act's penalties are harsher—no separate sentencing needed. The bench chided the trial court for sentencing ambiguity but clarified concurrent 20-year terms.
A procedural nudge: future POCSO trials must screen the accused behind a one-way mirror to shield child victims from trauma.
Key Observations
“One day, bajey (accused) carried me and took me to the road and put his hand inside my clothes and inserted his finger in my ‘susu garney’ (vagina) which hurt me (The witness gestured by pointing at her vagina with her finger).”
The victim's unwavering testimony, deemed reliable despite her age.
“From the evidence of PW-1 duly corroborated by PW-4 both of which are consistent and unwavering further supported by the evidence of PW-10, we are of the considered view that no error was committed... for convicting the Appellant of the offence of under Section 3(b) punishable under .”
The bench on evidence synergy.
“ means that, the insertion of any object or part of the body, ought to be to any extent into the vagina, urethra or anus of the child. It is not necessary that there has to be full penetration.”
Core legal principle, echoing headlines like 'Partial Penetration Suffices Under POCSO' from legal reports.
“On examination... reddish abrasion was present on the right side upper aspect of inner wall of labia minora and reddish tear was present at 6 o'clock position in the anal orifice... Sexual violence cannot be ruled out.”
Medical evidence pivotal to ruling out mere touching.
Verdict Locks In Justice—and a Warning
The appeal was dismissed on . Chettri's 20-year sentence under runs concurrently, with ₹6 lakh compensation to the victim upheld. Remitted records ensure compliance, copies routed to jail authorities.
This ruling fortifies POCSO's teeth against digital assaults, stressing minimal intrusion suffices for maximum penalty. It signals to predators: no loophole in "partial" acts against the vulnerable, potentially guiding trials nationwide where medical ambiguities arise.
