Section 29 POCSO Act Creates Presumption Of Guilt Against Accused Once Foundational Facts Established: Delhi High Court

The Court was hearing an appeal against conviction and sentence passed by a Special POCSO Court for offences under Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

A Bench comprising Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri, while adjudicating the matter, observed that “…even if the victim is the sole witness to the incident, a conviction can be sustained if her testimony is found to be credible and reliable. Further, Section 29 POCSO creates a presumption of guilt against the accused once the foundational facts of the case stand established.”

Advocate S.S. Ahluwalia appeared for the appellant, while APP Pradeep Gahalot represented the State.

Background

The prosecution’s case was based on the testimony of the victim, a minor child, who disclosed that the accused had lured and threatened her before repeatedly committing sexual assault. The child confided in a school teacher, which led to the registration of the case and investigation.

During the trial, the child consistently deposed against the accused, reiterating the acts of abuse and the threats made. The medical evidence recorded signs consistent with sexual assault. Though the forensic report did not recover male DNA, the Special POCSO Court found the testimony of the child victim credible and sufficient for conviction.

Court’s Observations

The High Court emphasised that lapses in investigation or minor inconsistencies did not undermine the reliability of the child victim’s testimony. It underscored that if the evidence of a child victim is consistent, reliable, and inspires confidence, it can form the sole basis of conviction.

While determining that corroboration of a child’s testimony is not mandatory, where it is found to be trustworthy, the Bench added that Section 29 of POCSO creates a presumption of guilt against the accused once the foundational facts are proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

The child’s testimony was found consistent and credible, supported by medical evidence, and free from indications of tutoring or false implication. The defence did not succeed in discrediting her testimony or offering any plausible alternative explanation.

“The MLC further lends support to the testimony of the child victim. These factors, taken together, establish the foundational facts of the prosecution case, thereby attracting the presumption under Section 29 POCSO.”, the court concluded.

Conclusion

Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction and sentence imposed by the Special POCSO Court. Finding no merits in the appeal, the Court accordingly dismissed it.

Cause Title: Tonny v. State (Neutral Citation: 2025:DHC:7752)

Appearances

Appellant: Advocate S.S. Ahluwalia

Respondents: APP Pradeep Gahalot, Advocate Ishaan S. Sharma with Advocate Himanshu Anand Gupta (DSLSA)