Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court Illicit Affair Alone Cannot Make a Man Guilty of Abetting Suicide: Supreme Court Quashes Charge Under Section 306 IPC Landlord Cannot Be Punished for Slowness of Courts: Supreme Court on Bonafide Need in Eviction Suits Expect States To Enact Laws Regulating Unlicensed Money Lenders Charging Exorbitant Interest Contrary To 'Damdupat': Supreme Court Accused Who Skips Lok Adalat After Seeking It, Then Cries 'Prejudice', Cannot Claim Apprehension of Denial of Justice: Madras High Court Refuse To Transfer Case IO Cannot Act Without Prior Sanction: Gujarat High Court Grants Bail, Flags Procedural Lapse in Religious Conversion Case Electricity Board Strictly Liable For Unprotected Transformer, 7-Year-Old Cannot Be Guilty Of Contributory Negligence: Allahabad High Court POCSO Conviction Can't Stand For Offence Not Charged: Delhi High Court Member of Unlawful Assembly Cannot Escape Conviction By Claiming He Only Carried a Lathi and Struck No One: Allahabad High Court Jurisdiction Cannot Be Founded On Casual Or Incidental Facts If Not Have A Direct Nexus With The Lis: : Delhi High Court Clause Stating Disputes "Can" Be Settled By Arbitration Is Not A Binding Arbitration Agreement: Supreme Court State Cannot Plead Helplessness Against Sand Mafia; Supreme Court Warns Of Paramilitary Deployment, Complete Mining Ban In MP & Rajasthan Authority Cannot Withdraw Subsidy Citing Non-Compliance When It Ignored Repeated Requests For Inspection: Supreme Court Out-of-State SC/ST/OBC Candidates Cannot Claim Rajasthan's Reservation Benefits in NEET PG Counselling: Rajasthan High Court Supreme Court Upholds Haryana's Regularisation Of Qualified Ad Hoc Staff As 'One-Time Measure', Strikes Down Futuristic Cut-Offs

Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction In Child Sexual Assault Case - Victim's Statements Consistent And Corroborated By Her Mother's Account

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant verdict, the Delhi High Court, through Justice Amit Bansal, upheld the conviction and sentence of an appellant found guilty of offences under Sections 342/363/376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO). The judgment, delivered on August 14, 2023, follows an appeal challenging the lower court's decision to convict the appellant.

The case revolved around the alleged sexual assault of a minor girl, who was just four and a half years old at the time of the incident. The appellant was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment based on his conviction under the said sections and acts. The trial court had convicted the appellant after considering the victim's testimony, medical evidence, and corroborating statements.

The judgment highlighted the importance of evaluating evidence while not attaching undue importance to minor discrepancies. It emphasized the credibility and reliability of the victim's testimony, taking into account the age of the victim. The court underscored that the absence of injuries does not necessarily negate the commission of a penetrative sexual assault.

The appellant's defense argued against the credibility of the victim's statements, pointing out inconsistencies. However, the court found that the victim's statements were consistent across various instances and corroborated by her mother's account. The judgment also referenced the statutory presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act, which strengthened the prosecution's case.

The court dismissed the appellant's appeal, concluding that the conviction was valid and well-supported by the evidence presented. The judgment reaffirmed the court's commitment to protecting the rights of victims, particularly in cases involving sexual offences against children. It highlighted the significance of proper adjudication and evaluation of evidence in such cases.

This landmark judgment underlines the court's commitment to ensuring justice and safeguarding the rights of victims in cases of child sexual assault. It serves as a precedent for similar cases and reiterates the importance of meticulous evaluation of evidence while upholding the principles of fairness and justice.

Date of Decision: August 14, 2023

RANJEET KUMAR YADAV   vs STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

                

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Ranjeet_Kumar_Yadav_vs_State_Of_Nct_Of_Delhi_on_14_August_2023_DelHC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News