Magistrate's Direction for Police Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Is Valid; Petitioner Must Await Investigation Outcome: Bombay High Court Dismisses Advocate's Petition as Premature    |     Tribunal’s Compensation Exceeding Claimed Amount Found Just and Fair Under Motor Vehicles Act: No Deduction Errors Warrant Reduction: Gujrat High Court    |     When Two Accused Face Identical Charges, One Cannot Be Convicted While the Other is Acquitted: Supreme Court Emphasizes Principle of Parity in Acquittal    |     Supreme Court Limits Interim Protection for Financial Institutions, Modifies Order on FIRs Filed by Borrowers    |     Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail in Methamphetamine Case After Delay in Chemical Analysis Report    |     No Sign of Recent Intercourse; No Injury Was Found On Her Body Or Private Parts: Gauhati High Court Acquits Two In Gang Rape Case    |     Failure to Disclose Relationship with Key Stakeholder Led to Setting Aside of Arbitral Award: Gujarat High Court    |     Strict Compliance with UAPA's 7-Day Timeline for Sanctions is Essential:  Supreme Court    |     PAT Teachers Entitled to Regularization from 2014, Quashes Prospective Regularization as Arbitrary: Himachal Pradesh High Court    |     Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Anonymity Protections for Victims in Sensitive Cases: Right to Privacy Prevails Over Right to Information    |     Certified Copy of Will Admissible Under Registration Act, 1908: Allahabad HC Dismisses Plea for Production of Original Will    |     Injuries on Non-Vital Parts Do Not Warrant Conviction for Attempt to Murder: Madhya Pradesh High Court Modifies Conviction Under Section 307 IPC to Section 326 IPC    |     Classification Based on Wikipedia Data Inadmissible; Tribunal to Reassess Using Actual Financial Records: PH High Court Orders Reconsideration of Wage Dispute    |     Mere Delay in Initiation Does Not Justify Reduction of Damages: Jharkhand High Court on Provident Fund Defaults    |     Legatee Can Continue Suit Without Probate, But Decree Contingent on Probate Approval: Orissa High Court    |     An Award that Shocks the Conscience of the Court Cannot Stand, Especially When Public Money is Involved: Calcutta HC Reduces Quantum by Half    |     Trademark Transaction Within Territoriality Principle Subject to Indian Tax Laws: Bombay High Court Dismisses Hindustan Unilever's Petition on Non-Deduction of TDS    |     Concealment of Material Facts Bars Relief under Article 226: SC Reprimands Petitioners for Lack of Bonafides    |     Without Determination of the Will's Genuineness, Partition is Impossible: Supreme Court on Liberal Approach to Pleading Amendments    |     Candidates Cannot Challenge a Selection Process After Participating Without Protest : Delhi High Court Upholds ISRO's Administrative Officer Recruitment    |     Invalid Bank Guarantee Invocation Found Fatal to Recovery Claim: Delhi High Court Dismisses GAIL’s Appeal    |     Adverse Remarks in APAR Recorded Without Objectivity and Likely Motivated by Bias: Delhi High Court Quashes Biased APAR Downgrade of CRPF Officer    |    

No Ground to Dismiss Prosecution Case Despite Investigation Lapses: High Court Upholds Conviction in POCSO Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Judicature at Patna upheld the life sentence and fine imposed on Sanjeev Kumar, convicted under the stringent POCSO Act and IPC for the sexual assault of his daughter. This decision, delivered by the bench comprising Honourable Mr. Justice Ashutosh Kumar and Honourable Mr. Justice Alok Kumar Pandey on November 7, 2023, emphasizes the sanctity of credible victim testimony in the face of procedural lapses during investigation.

The appellant, Sanjeev Kumar, had been sentenced by the trial court under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. The High Court’s ruling came after a meticulous examination of the evidence and testimonies presented during the trial.

The bench noted, “Merely because an investigation is perfunctory, that is no ground to completely discard the prosecution case, especially in view of the clear and cogent evidence of the victim herself.” This observation underscores the Court’s stance on the significance of victim accounts, even when investigative procedures exhibit flaws.

Mr. Ajit Ranjan Kumar, advocating for the appellant, highlighted various procedural discrepancies, including the lack of a conclusive medical report confirming rape and the failure to properly investigate the crime scene. However, the Court found these arguments insufficient to overturn the conviction, given the compelling testimony of the victim and corroborative evidence from other family members.

Representing the State, Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha, APP, argued for the reliability and consistency of the victim’s allegations against her father. The Court’s decision reflects a balancing act between evidential sufficiency and procedural exactitude, prioritizing the gravitas of victim testimony in cases of sexual offenses against minors.

This ruling also brings to light the Court’s approach towards cases involving sexual offenses, especially under the POCSO Act, where the testimony of the victim holds significant weight. The decision is seen as a reaffirmation of the judicial system’s commitment to protecting the rights and dignity of sexual assault survivors, particularly minors.

The High Court’s dismissal of the appeal sends a strong message about the serious nature of offenses under the POCSO Act and the importance of upholding justice for victims of sexual violence, irrespective of the accused’s relationship with the victim.

Date of Decision: 07-11-2023

Sanjeev Kumar  VS The State Of Bihar         

Similar News