Sale Deeds Must Be Interpreted Literally When the Language is Clear and Unambiguous: Supreme Court    |     Non-Signatory Can Be Bound by Arbitration Clause Based on Conduct and Involvement: Supreme Court    |     Right to Passport is a Fundamental Right, Denial Without Justification Violates Article 21: Allahabad High Court    |     Insurance Company's Liability Remains Despite Policy Cancellation Due to Dishonored Cheque: Calcutta High Court    |     Deductions Under Sections 36(1)(vii) and 36(1)(viia) of the Income Tax Act Are Independent and Cannot Be Curtailed: Bombay High Court    |     Diary Entries Cannot Alone Implicate the Accused Without Corroborative Evidence: Supreme Court Upholds Discharge of Accused in Corruption Case    |     MACT | Fraud Vitiates All Judicial Acts, Even Without Specific Review Powers: Rajasthan High Court    |     Right of Private Defense Cannot Be Weighed in Golden Scales: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Appellant in Culpable Homicide Case    |     If Two Reasonable Conclusions Are Possible, Acquittal Should Not Be Disturbed: Supreme Court    |     Kalelkar Award Explicitly Provides Holiday Benefits for Temporary Employees, Not Subject to Government Circulars: Supreme Court Upholds Holiday and Overtime Pay    |     NDPS | Homogeneous Mixing of Bulk Drugs Essential for Valid Sampling Under NDPS Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court    |     Pre-Arrest Bail Not a Right but an Exception: Himachal High Court Denied Bail In Dowry Death Case"    |     POCSO | Scholar Register Is Sufficient to Determine Victim’s Age in POCSO Cases: Madhya Pradesh High Court    |     Abuse of Official Position in Appointments: Prima Facie Case for Criminal Misconduct: Delhi High Court Upholds Framing of Charges Against Swati Maliwal in DCW Corruption Case    |     Service Law | Similarly Situated Employees Cannot Be Denied Equal Treatment: PH High Court Orders Regularization    |     Presumption of Innocence Remains Supreme Unless Clearly Overturned: PH High Court Affirming Acquittal    |     Any Physical Liaison with A Girl Of Less Than Eighteen Years Is A Strict Offense.: Patna High Court Reiterates Strict Stance On Sexual Offences Against Minors    |     Orissa High Court Rules Res Judicata Inapplicable When Multiple Appeals Arise from Same Judgment    |     Mandatory Section 80 Notice Cannot Be Bypassed Lightly:  Jammu & Kashmir High Court Returns Plaint for Non-Compliance    |     Bombay High Court Denies Permanent Lecturer Appointment for Failing to Meet UGC Eligibility Criteria at Time of Appointment    |     Deferred Cross-Examination Gave Time for Witness Tampering, Undermining Fair Trial: Allahabad High Court    |     Dowry Death | Presumption Under Section 113-B Not Applicable as No Proof of Cruelty Soon Before Death : Supreme Court    |    

Any Physical Liaison with A Girl Of Less Than Eighteen Years Is A Strict Offense.: Patna High Court Reiterates Strict Stance On Sexual Offences Against Minors

21 September 2024 12:50 PM

By: sayum


On September 12, 2024, the Patna High Court delivered a significant ruling in Vikash Sah v. The State of Bihar, upholding the appellant's conviction and life sentence for the rape of a minor under Section 376(1) of the IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012. The court dismissed the appellant's claims of a consensual relationship, emphasizing that any sexual activity with a minor constitutes a strict offense.

The case arose from an incident on August 3, 2017, involving the rape of a 17-year-old girl by her neighbor, Vikash Sah. The victim reported that while sleeping in her courtyard, the appellant climbed over the wall, threatened her with a dagger, and committed the rape. Due to fear and threats from the appellant, she delayed reporting the incident until October 24, 2017. The victim's father, upon learning of the crime, returned from Mumbai and lodged a complaint with the police, leading to the appellant's trial and subsequent conviction.

The appellant's defense hinged on the delay in lodging the FIR, suggesting it cast doubt on the accusation. The appellant also argued that the relationship was consensual and questioned the POCSO court's jurisdiction, alleging the victim was not a minor. The defense challenged the reliance on a school certificate to establish the victim's age.

The prosecution countered these arguments by highlighting the victim's fear and the threats that caused the delay in reporting. The prosecution also noted that the victim became pregnant, sought permission for termination from the High Court, and the DNA evidence conclusively matched the appellant with the fetus.

The court found the victim's delay in reporting the crime plausible, given the threats made by the appellant. The court noted that the victim's father corroborated her account, stating he acted promptly upon learning of the incident. The investigating officer, Indira Rani (PW-3), testified that the victim was a minor based on a school certificate, which went unchallenged during the trial.

The court dismissed the appellant's argument about the consensual nature of the relationship, noting the strict liability imposed by the POCSO Act for sexual activity with minors. The judgment emphasized, "There can be no presumption that two young persons if they are neighbours are bound to get physically attracted to each other." It further clarified that even if the relationship had been consensual, the appellant's actions constituted an offense under the POCSO Act.

The court also rejected the defense's argument regarding the lack of recent signs of sexual intercourse and discrepancies in the pregnancy timeline, considering the significant time elapsed since the incident and the victim's intention to terminate the pregnancy.

The High Court upheld the life imprisonment sentence of Vikash Sah, confirming the trial court's judgment. The court's ruling underscores the legal principle that any sexual liaison with a minor, irrespective of consent, is a punishable offense under the POCSO Act.

Date of Decision: September 12, 2024

Vikash Sah v. The State of Bihar

Similar News