The Supreme Court has reduced the sentence imposed upon the accused persons under section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, from life imprisonment to twenty years. The Apex Court noted that the accused persons were in their mid-twenties and also observed that the minimum punishment delineated under the said Section is twenty years.

The appellants-convicts approached the Apex Court challenging their conviction under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the POCSO Act.

Referring to section 6 of the POCSO Act, the Division Bench of Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma held, “On a reading of the same, we find that the minimum punishment delineated under the said Section is twenty years but which may extend to imprisonment for life which shall mean imprisonment for remainder of natural life of the accused and shall be liable to fine or with death.”

AOR Md. Farman represented the Appellant, while AOR Apoorv Shukla represented the Respondent.

Arguments

It was the appellants’ case that if the Court was not inclined to interfere with the conviction of the appellants, then at least the appeals could be considered vis-à-vis reduction in their sentence, having regard to Section 6 of the POCSO Act. It was contended that the minimum sentence under Section 6 is twenty years, whereas the Trial Court has imposed life imprisonment for the remainder of the natural life which is a harsh punishment.

Reasoning

The Bench was not inclined to interfere with the judgment of conviction passed by the Special Court and which was affirmed by the impugned order.

The Bench noticed that the Special Court had imposed the higher punishment of life imprisonment for the remainder of natural life of the person. “However, the minimum sentence under Section 6 of the POCSO Act is twenty years”, the Bench said.

The Apex Court found that the appellants were in their early twenties when the incident took place, and now they had completed only five years of incarceration. “...we find that the appellants are now in their mid-twenties and even if the minimum sentence is to be completed they would be in their early forties”, it added,

Thus, allowing the appeals in part, the Bench ordered, “We find that the interest of justice would be served in the instant case, if we reduce the sentence imposed on them from imprisonment for life, which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of natural life to twenty years.”

Cause Title: Pintu Thakur @ Ravi Etc. v. State of Chhattisgarh (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 797)

Appearance

Appellants: AOR Md. Farman, Advocates Salman Khan, Aditya Tanwar

Respondent: AOR Apoorv Shukla, Advocate Prabhleen A. Shukla

Click here to read/download Judgment



Justice BV NagarathnaJustice Satish Chandra Sharma

Tulip Kanth

Assistant Editor

Tulip Kanth is an Assistant Editor at Verdictum having over 5 years of experience in the field of legal journalism and editing. She extensively covers judgments of the Supreme Court, High Courts as well as Tribunals. She has previously worked with a legal publishing website where she oversaw the work of other editors and has also created updates on notifications of different Government Ministries. She holds an English Honours Degree from SGTB Khalsa College, Delhi University and has completed her LLB course with specialisation in Corporate Law from Amity University.