Madhya Pradesh High Court Dismisses State's Appeal for Lack of Diligence, Imposes Costs on Officials

Court Directs Departmental Enquiry and Imposes Rs. 20,000 Cost for Mechanical Filing of Appeal under POCSO Act

In a significant judgment, the Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed an appeal filed by the State of Madhya Pradesh against Shashikant Jogi, emphasizing the lack of diligence and application of mind by the officials responsible for filing the appeal. The Division Bench comprising Justices Shri Vivek Agarwal and Ramkumar Choubey highlighted the improper preparation of the appeal under the POCSO Act and the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which resulted in unnecessary litigation and wastage of judicial resources.

The case revolved around the conviction of Shashikant Jogi under Section 5(L)/6 of the POCSO Act, where he was sentenced to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment and fined Rs. 20,000. The State's appeal argued that the trial court should have also sentenced the accused under Section 376(2)(N) of the IPC. However, the High Court pointed out that Section 42 of the POCSO Act necessitates choosing the provision that prescribes a greater punishment, which in this case was the POCSO Act.

The Court, in its judgment dated November 28, 2025, noted the failure of the officials, including the Law Officer and District Public Prosecutor, to read and understand the relevant statutory provisions before sanctioning the appeal. This oversight led to the dismissal of the appeal with a cost of Rs. 20,000 imposed on the State, to be recovered from the responsible official rather than the public exchequer. The amount is to be paid to the High Court Legal Services Committee to benefit poor litigants.

Moreover, the Court ordered a departmental enquiry against the officials involved in the appeal's sanctioning and filing process. The enquiry aims to hold accountable those who failed to apply their minds and to submit an Action Taken Report within 60 days. This judgment serves as a stern reminder to government officials to exercise due diligence and legal understanding in judicial proceedings.

Bottom Line:

Appeal by the State dismissed for lack of application of mind in preparing the appeal under POCSO Act and IPC; cost imposed on the State to be recovered from the delinquent official responsible for filing the appeal without proper understanding of the law.

Statutory provision(s): POCSO Act, 2012 Section 42, Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 376(2)(N)

State of Madhya Pradesh v. Shashikant Jogi, (Madhya Pradesh)(Jabalpur)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2814137