Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction in POCSO Case, Emphasizes Protection for Minor Victims
Rajnish's appeal dismissed; court reinforces the importance of statutory presumptions in cases involving minors.
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction of Rajnish, who was found guilty of kidnapping and sexually assaulting a minor under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The appeal was dismissed by the court on September 24, 2025, reinforcing the statutory presumptions that safeguard minors in cases of sexual offences.
The case originated from an FIR filed on March 8, 2017, by the father of the prosecutrix, reporting his 14-year-old daughter's disappearance. The investigation revealed that the minor was enticed and taken to Farukhabad by Rajnish, where they reportedly lived together and engaged in sexual relations. The prosecutrix was found to be pregnant, which further corroborated the allegations of repeated sexual assault.
Justice Sanjeev Narula, presiding over the case, emphasized the reliability of the prosecutrix's testimony, stating that her accounts were consistent and credible, despite minor inconsistencies. The court reiterated that the testimony of a minor victim, if coherent and credible, could form the foundation for conviction without the need for independent corroboration.
The age of the prosecutrix was a crucial factor in the judgment. School records, presented by the Principal of the prosecutrix's school, confirmed her date of birth as June 16, 2003, making her a minor at the time of the incident. This established her age and triggered the statutory presumptions under Sections 29 and 30 of the POCSO Act, rendering any consent irrelevant.
Rajnish's defense, which highlighted inconsistencies in the prosecutrix's statements and questioned the reliability of the school records, was dismissed by the court. The court found that the evidence presented, including medical records confirming the minor's pregnancy, substantiated the charges against Rajnish.
The court also addressed procedural lapses, such as the mishandling of forensic samples, but concluded that these did not undermine the core evidence supporting the prosecution's case. The ruling emphasized the legal framework designed to protect minors, underscoring that the purported consent or affection of a minor cannot negate the criminality of such acts.
In conclusion, the court affirmed Rajnish's conviction and the sentences imposed: three years for kidnapping under Section 363 IPC, five years under Section 366 IPC for abduction with intent, and ten years under Section 6 of the POCSO Act for aggravated sexual assault. The court also directed the Delhi State Legal Services Authority (DSLSA) to facilitate the disbursement of compensation to the victim, reinforcing the emphasis on victim support and rehabilitation.
Bottom Line:
The testimony of a minor prosecutrix, if coherent, consistent, and credible, can form the foundation for conviction under sexual assault provisions, even without independent corroboration.
Statutory provision(s): Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 415(2), Section 528; Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n); Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Sections 5(1), 6; Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 Section 94(2).
Rajnish v. State NCT of Delhi, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc id # 2786336
