Victim’s Fear Identifying Accused In Court A Pointer In Itself: Supreme Court Upholds Conviction In POCSO Case

The Court was hearing an appeal challenging the judgment of the High Court of Chhattisgarh, which had affirmed the conviction and seven-year sentence imposed by the Special Judge (POCSO).

A Bench comprising Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice N.V. Anjaria held that “the fact that the victim was in a frightened state upon seeing the accused is a pointer in itself,” and upheld the conviction while slightly modifying the sentence.

Advocate Varnika Gupta appeared for the appellant, and Advocate Ankita Sharma represented the State.

Background

The prosecution alleged that the appellant entered the residence of the victim’s family, where the minor child, aged between four and five years, was sleeping. The mother of the child (PW-3) reported that upon entering the room, she saw the appellant wearing only half-shorts and positioned near the legs of the child. When confronted, the appellant fled.

PW-3 noted that the child’s clothing had been displaced and that the child complained of pain. A prompt FIR was registered under Sections 376 and 376AB of the IPC and Sections 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act. Medical examination recorded redness in the genital area.

After the trial, the Special Judge convicted the appellant under Section 9(m) read with Section 10 of the POCSO Act and sentenced him to seven years’ rigorous imprisonment. The High Court affirmed the conviction and sentence.

Court’s Observation

The Supreme Court examined the testimony of PW-2 (father), PW-3 (mother), the medical officers, and the record of PW-1, the child victim’s appearance in court. The Court found the statements of PW-2 and PW-3 to be consistent and credible.

The Bench noted that although the medical report did not record external injuries, redness in the victim’s genital area had been observed. The Court reiterated the settled principle that medical evidence does not override clear and cogent ocular evidence, holding that “the medical evidence will take a backseat…where the ocular evidence is consistent and cogent.”

The Apex Court noted that the Special Judge had recorded that upon seeing the unmasked accused, the child became frightened, did not speak, and began crying. The proceedings had to be halted twice. When the child was called again with her mother, she remained unable to speak due to fear.

The Court observed that the victim’s behaviour was a pointer in itself and consistent with the trauma of a child of such tender age who had undergone a distressing incident.

On the applicability of Sections 9(m) and 10 of the POCSO Act, the Court recorded that both the trial court and the High Court had concurrently found that the appellant had committed aggravated sexual assault on a child below 12 years. The Court held that the appreciation of evidence by the courts below was eminently legal and proper.

The appellant’s argument that the absence of penetration should lead to acquittal was rejected, the Court holding that the evidence on record sufficiently established aggravated sexual assault under Section 9(m).

Conclusion

The Supreme Court held that the conviction was justified and required no interference.

However, considering that the appellant had already undergone approximately four years and five months of imprisonment, the Court reduced the sentence from seven years to six years’ rigorous imprisonment. The fine and default sentence imposed by the trial court was maintained.

The appeal was partly allowed to this limited extent, and pending applications were disposed of.

Cause Title: Dinesh Kumar Jaldhari v. State of Chhattisgarh (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 1317)

Appearances

Appellant: Advocate Varnika Gupta

Respondent: Advocate Ankita Sharma

Click here to read/download Judgment