SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS CONVICTION IN CHILD SEXUAL ASSAULT CASE

Case Name: Deepak Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh
Case Number: Criminal Appeal No. 26453 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) (D) No. 26453 of 2025)
Date: Monday, the Fifth Day of August, Two Thousand and Twenty-Five
Quorum: Sri Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Sri Justice N.V. Anjaria

 

 

Facts of the Case 

 

• This case arises as an appeal which addressed the challenge to the judgment and order dated 22nd September 2023, passed by the Chhattisgarh High Court, whereby the Court agreed to the judgment and order passed by the Special Court convicting and sentencing the accused. 
• As per the prosecution’s case, the incident occurred on 03.04.2018 at about 12.00 noon. The incident, as per the prosecution, is that the victim, aged about 15 years, and her younger brother, aged about 11 years, named Mayank, were alone in their house as their parent went out to the village to attend the funeral of a family member. 
• Finding the victim alone in the house, the appellant-accused entered the house, sent the victim’s brother to buy and bring a pack of chewing tobacco and after making sure the brother left the house, the accused forced the victim to lie on the cot in the porch area of the house, gagged her mouth and then committed sexual intercourse.
• When the brother came back to the home, the appellant-accused fled the house, threatening the victim not to tell anyone what had happened. However, the victim, soon after the incident had happened, rushed to the house of her cousin sister, Dushyantin and talked about the incident. Soon, the brother of Dushyantin, named Khomendra, who went out with the victim’s parents, was also informed of the incident through mobile phone. When the victim’s parents rushed back home, she narrated the whole incident and a police complaint was lodged, and an FIR was registered under Section 450 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and also under Section 376(2) of the Indian Penal Code.
•  

Issues Involved 

 

1. Whether the prosecution was able to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. 
2. Whether the prosecution was right in establishing that the victim was a minor at the time of the commission of the crime.

Legal Provisions cited

 

• • Section 450 of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with house-trespass in order to commit an offence punishable with imprisonment for life.  

• Section 4 of the POCSO, which deals with the offence of “penetrative sexual assault”, for which the convicted person may get at least 10 years of either description imprisonment, which may be extended to imprisonment for life.  

• Section 376(2) of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with the punishment for rape, and provides for a punishment of rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than twenty years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life. 

Arguments of the Parties 

 

Arguments of the Appellant 

• It was contended by the counsel for the appellant that the prosecution failed to prove or establish the case beyond a reasonable doubt, and it was not possible to rule out the theory of innocence of the appellant. 
• In this regard, the evidence of the prosecutrix was considered to be unreliable and was asked to be closely examined, as the medical report was not categorical in confirming the offence of sexual assault and rape on the victim.   
• It was also submitted by the counsel for the appellant that there were contradictions between the evidence of the victim and her younger brother. 
• Lastly, it was also contended that the prosecution failed to establish the age of the victim as a minor at the time of the commission of the incident; therefore, the provisions of the POCSO Act do not apply.
• Prosecution’s Argument 

• The prosecution submitted that the testimonies of the victims as well as other witnesses were clear, consistent and natural, narrating the incident. 

• The prosecution also submitted the medical report, which showed a ruptured hymen and healing, though there were no external injury marks.

• Age of the victim was also established through the 8th standard certificate of the victim, which showed the victim’s birth date as 19.10.2002, which made her 15 years 5 months and 24 days old at the time of the incident that occurred on 03.04.2018, which was also corroborated by the evidence of the father and the mother of the victim.

Analysis

 

• Age Determination: – The court, while rejecting the contention of the Appellant regarding the minority of the victim, held that there was cogent evidence supporting the minority of the victim, that is, the marksheet from the victim’s 8th standard, which in turn was supported by the parents’ testimony.  

• • Contradicting Testimony: – The court, while rejecting the contention of the Appellant that there are contradicting testimonies by the prosecution witnesses, held that there are no material contradictions between the victim’s and her brother’s testimony, noting that small and minor discrepancies do not undermine the prosecution case when the core narrative and the meaning remains the same.

• Reliability of the Victim’s testimony: – The Court while addressing the reliability of the victim’s testimony in a rape case, despite having inconclusive medical evidence, reinforced that the testimony of a rape victim should not be viewed with suspicion and corroboration is not mandatorily required when the testimony and the evidence show and inspire confidence. 

Judgement 

 

 The Supreme Court, in this case, dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction by the Trial Courts. The Court held that the victim’s minority was rightly established through documentary as well as oral evidence, and the sole testimony of the victim can sustain the conviction in rape cases when the testimony is consistent and credible, even in cases where the medical report or the evidence is not conclusive. The Court also held that while dealing with sensitive matters like minor rape cases, it should remain cautious and sensitive and should make sure that minor discrepancies in the testimonies of the witnesses do not affect the core prosecution case. 

 

Conclusion

 

The Supreme Court reaffirmed the well-established principle of criminal jurisprudence in sexual assault cases, reinforcing that the testimony of the victim should be given the same weight as that of an injured witness and that corroboration of the evidence and testimony is not an essential requirement for conviction in rape cases. The Court, through this case, made clear that the Court should not view the evidence and the testimony of a rape victim with suspicion but should assess them based on their credibility and consistency, and that the absence of external injuries and a conclusive medical report should not be a reason to acquit the accused when the testimony of the victim and the witnesses are reliable. The dismissal of the appeal in this case by the Supreme Court establishes the seriousness with which a sexual assault case must be viewed, especially when the victim is a minor. This judgment serves as an important precedent for future cases involving sexual assault where medical evidence may not be conclusive in nature, but the testimony of the victim and the witnesses remains credible and consistent. 

 

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

 

WRITTEN BY: YANA S JACOB 

Click here to read more