1 2025:CGHC:38702-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1203 of 2025 Sarju Kumar @ Sarju Nirmalkar S/o Late Radheshyam Nirmalkar Aged About 20 Years R/o Banki Basti, Near Sub Station P.S. Banki Mongra, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Bankimongra, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellant(s) : Mr. Virendra Kumar Janardan, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Soumya Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, J. Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, CJ 05.08.2025 1. This appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.01.2020 passed by the learned Special Court (POCSO) / Juvenile Court Katghora, District- Korba (C.G.) in Special Case No. 12/2019, whereby the appellant has been MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2025.08.07 10:39:27 +0530 2 convicted for offence under Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter called as ‘POSCO’) and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.5000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo Imprisonment for one month. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the victim gave an oral complaint letter (Ex.P.1) in the Bankimongra police station to the effect that she lives with her family in Banki Basti next to the sub- station and studies in class 8 in Banki No. 2 school. Her mother keeps fast during Navratri. As Navratri was near, she needed a stair for cleaning the house, so she went to the house of accused Sarju Nirmalkar at around 11 o'clock. Sarju Nirmalkar is her maternal uncle. His house is close to her house. When she reached the house of accused Sarju, Sarju was alone in the house. The people of his house had gone out for some work. When she asked Sarju to give her the stair, he said that it is inside the room, go and take it out. Then she went inside the room and started looking for the stair here and there, but the stair was not there. As soon as she entered the room, Sajru also followed her into the room and tried to catch him. She asked her uncle as what he is doing, then he caught hold of her and threw her down and pulled off her panties and himself got naked and climbed upon her and forcibly did bad things with her. She kept on forbidding him, kept crying and struggling, but he did not leave her. After doing the bad thing he left her. Then she got up, wore her panties and 3 ran crying to her house and told her mother the whole thing about the incident. Then her mother told her father, aunt and the people of the neighborhood about the incident. Expressing that the accused had not committed the crime, trial was sought. Plea of the accused was recorded. 3. In the case, entire prosecution evidence was taken and the statements made against the accused under Section 313 CrPC were prepared and the accused statement was taken. The accused in his reply denied all the evidences against him, declared himself innocent and said that he was falsely implicated and expressed his wish not to give defence evidence. 4. At the stage of the case, the charge framed against the accused under Section 376 IPC was amended as an alternative, which was read out and explained, on which the prosecution and the accused expressed their wish not to give any evidence nor did they request to call any previous witness. 5. On the above report, a case was registered against the accused by Bankimongra Police Station under Section 376 (2) (f) IPC and Section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 and investigation was done. During the investigation, the statement of the accused and her parents was taken. After taking consent from the accused and her parents, the accused was sent to CHC Katghora for examination. After going to the place of incident, a site map of the place of incident (Ex.P. 4) was prepared 4 in front of witnesses. On being presented by the accused, the underwear worn by the accused was seized. The site map of the place of incident was prepared by the concerned Patwari. The statement of the accused was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in front of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Katghora. Since the accused was a minor on the date of the incident, the applicant's Dakhil Kharij register and mark-sheet were seized in relation to her age. The accused was arrested and sent to judicial custody. After complete investigation, prima facie evidence of the accused committing the above crime was found and the charge sheet was presented before the Special Court (POCSO) on 12/04/2019 for trial against the accused. 6. In the case, the Special Court (POCSO) has framed charges against the accused under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 04 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 and has read out the same to the accused. 7. The prosecution has produced in support of its case the evidence of the victim (PW-1), mother of the victim (PW-2), father of the victim (PW-3), aunt of the victim (PW-4), Shri Ravi Das (PW-5), Inspector Shri S.C. Shukla (PW-6), Medical Officer Dr. R.P.S. Kanwar (PW-7), Medical Officer Dr. Mrs. B. Tigga (PW-8), teacher of the prosecutor's school (PW-9) and Patwari Ms. Narmada Sharma (PW-10) and exhibited the documents (Exs.P-1 to P-23). 5 8. After appreciation of evidence available on record, the learned trial Court has convicted the accused/appellant and sentenced him as mentioned in para 1 of the judgment. Hence, this appeal. 9. Mr. Virendra Kumar Janardan, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned judgment, conviction and sentence dated 07.01.2020 awarded by the Trial Court is bad in law, perverse, thus liable to be set aside. He further submits that the appellant is relative uncle to the victim and he has not committed any aforesaid offence as alleged by the prosecution against him and prosecution has failed to prove the case against the appellant and complaint made by the prosecution is false and fabricated allegation against him. Further, the complainant has made complaint against the appellant without any specific reason based upon the false and baseless of allegation but he has not committed any aforesaid offences as alleged by the prosecution against him. The learned trial Court relied upon the statement given by aunty of the victim (P.W.-4) and maternal uncle of the victim (P.W.-5) who are not reliable and untrustworthy, unsupported to the case hence the impugned judgment of conviction is liable to be set- aside. The learned trial Court has also not considered the material available on record and the victim is major and she was love affairs with the appellant and she has well known about right or wrong and she does not commit any aforesaid offence against her consent, whereas the appellant has not committed any of aforesaid offences as alleged by the 6 prosecution against him without any her consent. There are various contradiction and omissions between the statement of prosecution witnesses, but the learned trial Court has not properly scrutinized the same before convicting the present appellant. As per the evidence and material available on record, no offence of conviction against the appellant is made out. Reliance is placed upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter of Jarnail Singh vs. State of Haryana, reported in (2013) 7 SCC 263. 10. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant and submits that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and the victim (PW-1) has clearly deposed the conduct of the appellant in her statement recorded under Section 164 CrPC and in the Court statement and the learned trial Court after considering the material available on record has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant, in which no interference is called for. 11. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 12. The issue that arises for consideration in the present appeal is whether the testimony of the victim deserves acceptance and whether the prosecution has established the case of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. 7 13. It is pertinent to observe that the question whether conviction of the accused can be based on the sole testimony of the victim in cases of sexual assault/rape is no longer res integra. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has dealt with the issue in a catena of judgments and has held that the sole testimony of the prosecutrix if found reliable can be the sole ground for convicting the accused and that the creditworthy testimony of the victim in cases of such nature deserves acceptance. 14. The next issue that arises for consideration in the present appeal is whether the age of the victim on the date of commission of the offence concerned, was below 18 years of age. 15. Concept of age as per the provisions of section-94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, reads as under:- (1) Where, it is obvious to the Committee or the Board, based on the appearance of the person brought before it under any of the provisions of this Act (other than for the purpose of giving evidence) that the said person is a child, the Committee or the Board shall record such observation stating the age of the child as nearly as may be and proceed with the inquiry under section 14 or section 36, as the case may be, without waiting for further confirmation of the age. (2) In case, the Committee or the Board has reasonable grounds for doubt regarding whether the person brought before it is a child or not, the Committee or the Board, 8 as the case may be, shall undertake the process of age determination, by seeking evidence by obtaining— (i) the date of birth certificate from the school, or the matriculation or equivalent certificate from the concerned examination Board, if available; and in the absence thereof; (ii) the birth certificate given by a corporation or a municipal authority or a panchayat; (iii) and only in the absence of (i) and (ii) above, age shall be determined by an ossification test or any other latest medical age determination test conducted on the orders of the Committee or the Board: Provided such age determination test conducted on the order of the Committee or the Board shall be completed within fifteen days from the date of such order. (3) The age recorded by the Committee or the Board to be the age of person so brought before it shall, for the purpose of this Act, be deemed to be the true age of that person. 16. As per case of the prosecution, the date of birth of the victim is 20.02.2005 and on this basis, on the date of incident i.e. 31.03.2019, the age of the victim was less than 18 years. To substantiate this fact, prosecution has adduced Admission- Discharge register of Government Primary School, Banki Village, Tehsil- Katghora, District- Korba (C.G.), which has been proved by the Assistant Teacher of the said school Ajay Kumar Sahu (PW-9). 9 This witness has clearly deposed in his deposition that in the Admission-Discharge register information with regard to victim has been noted in Sl. No. 2574. He has also stated that as per this Register, the date of birth of victim is 20.02.2005. 17. The date of birth of the victim was recorded as 20.02.2005 in the Admission-Discharge register and on the basis of which victim was found to be less than 18 years of age on the date of incident. The appellant did not adduce any evidence to discard aforesaid age of the victim. 18. In this regard, the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of M.P vs Preetam AIR 2018 S.C. 4212 is noteworthy. According to which, "School register is an authentic document kept in the official curriculum, which is attributed great weight until proved otherwise." Similarly, where the admission and dismissal register of the primary school of the plaintiff is presented in relation to her date of birth, the entry of the primary school of the plaintiff will be considered valid. In this regard, the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court - Ashwani Kumar Saxena vs State of M.P on 13 September, 2012 is noteworthy. According to which- 45. We are of the view that admission register in the school in which the candidate first attended is a relevant piece of evidence of the date of birth. The reasoning that the parents could have entered a wrong date of birth in the admission register hence not a correct date of birth is equal to thinking that 10 parents would do so in anticipation that child would commit a crime in future and, in that situation, they could successfully raise a claim of juvenility. 19. Thus, on the basis of aforesaid oral and documentary evidence, we find that the learned trial Court has rightly held in paragraph 12 of the impugned judgment that on the date of incident the victim was child i.e. below the age of 18 years. 20. Now, next question for consideration is whether the appellant committed rape with the victim girl, who was a minor girl less than 18 years of age on the date of incident. 21. In this regard, the victim (PW-1) states that on 31/03/2019 at 10.30 a.m. she went to the house of accused Sarju Nirmalkar when her mother sent her to bring a ladder and when she reached the house of accused Sarju Nirmalkar and called his mother, Sarju's mother did not respond, she called Indu mausi as well and when she did not receive a response from Indu mausi, she asked the accused Sarju Nirmalkar present there about his mother and his aunt and the accused told her that they had gone to collect Mahua flowers. Then when she asked the accused about the ladder, the accused told her that there was a ladder kept inside the room and she should go and get it. Then when she went inside the house and looked in one room, she found that there was no ladder, and the accused told her that there was a ladder in the front room. As soon as she went to look in the front room, she was about to reach the front room when the accused Sarju 11 Nirmalkar came from behind, caught her leg, threw her down, climbed on her, took off her clothes and then she was beaten up. She tells that she was raped and while crying before the trial Court, she says that she was suffering a lot of pain due to the said rape by the accused. She further stated that she went to the house of the accused along with the niece of the accused, aged 3 years and the accused threw her down and beat her. On seeing the rape taking place with the victim, the accused's niece is stated to be crying and she says that after raping her, when she was running away to her house, he had said that if she tells her parents, he will kill her. She also stated that she fell on the road while running. She reaches home crying and tells her mother about the incident. Her mother tells the same to her maternal uncle and aunt and then her mother called police station and when police came, she says that the police took her mother, aunt and her to the police station in their car and registered a report of Exhibit P-1 at the police station. She says that the police made a visual map of the place of incident of the house of the accused, Exhibit P-4, and the chaddi (underwear) worn by her at the time of the incident was confiscated. She says that the map of the house of the accused was also made by the Patwari. She says that the accused was wearing a towel at the time of the incident and that she herself was wearing a suit and silks at the time of the incident. 22. The mother of the victim (PW-2) stated that she admits that she had sent the victim to the house of the accused to get a ladder 12 and about half an hour later her daughter came to her house crying and screaming and the victim told her that the accused had raped her by throwing her on the ground at his house. In cross- examination, this witness accepts that a small girl also went to the house of the accused along with the victim and that her house was on one side of the road and the house of the accused was on the other side of the road and that there was a constant movement of people on that road from morning to evening and that the victim removed the silks and kurti that she was wearing at the time of the incident and wore other clothes and went to report in the same clothes. Thus, the statements of the victim about going to the house of the accused to get a ladder and the prosecutrix telling this witness about the incident are supported by the statements of this witness. 23. The father of the victim (PW-3) says that the victim told him about the incident and also says that the police officers seized the panties of the victim in his presence. 24. S.C. Shukla (PW-6), being a retired Inspector, states that the victim had lodged a report against the accused at the police station and the victim was sent for medical examination and the site map (Exhibit P-4) was prepared and the undergarments worn by the victim at the time of the incident were seized before witnesses when they produced them and that the undergarments worn by the accused at the time of the incident were also seized 13 on the date of incident i.e. 31/03/2019 itself and that semen-like stains were also present on his undergarments. 25. 25. The said witness S.C. Shukla (PW-6), after the medical examination of the victim, on presenting a sealed packet from the Community Health Center, Katghora by lady constable Meena Kaivart, says that it was confiscated and that the slide of the private part of the victim and the secretion of the private part of the victim in the said sealed packet were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Raipur for DNA test and that the FSL report Exhibit P-21 was received from there and says that an application for permission for DNA test of accused Sarju Nirmalkar was also sent and that the statement of the victim was recorded by the lady head constable present at the police station and that the First Information Report was registered at 11.30 a.m. and that he went to the scene of the incident at 12.20 p.m. and that the undergarments were confiscated at the police station and that the ladder was also not confiscated from the scene of the incident and that there was no ladder there. 26. On studying the FSL report (Exhibit P-21), it is mentioned that semen stains and human sperm were found in the panties of the victim i.e. Article A-1, and immediately after the incident, the said panties of the victim were seized by the police. As such, finding of semen stains and sperm in the panties of the victim immediately 14 after the incident supports the statements of the victim that the accused had committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim. 27. Dr. R.P.S. Kanwar (PW-7) also states that the accused was capable of having intercourse and Dr. Mrs. B. Tigga (PW-4) on examination of the victim states that there was redness in the labia minora and majora of the victim and there was a bruised wound over the perineum and blood was oozing from the said bruised wound and that the vulva of the victim was found to be red and swollen and that the hymen of the victim was also torn and that there was effacement in the perineal region and that two slides of the vaginal discharge of the victim were prepared, sealed and handed over to the constable and that the vaginal discharge of the victim was also sealed and handed over to the constable and that according to her opinion, intercourse had taken place with the victim and she denies that there were no injury marks on the body of the victim and denies that the victim had been injured during intercourse. As such, the redness that she found in Libya Menora Mejora during the examination of the victim is the redness that a 13-14 year old girl may get during her menstruation. Thus, this witness denies that the redness is due to menstruation and this witness also denies that the redness that the victim had is due to friction during menstruation and also denies that the prosecutrix is used to having sexual intercourse. From the statements of this witness, the vaginal examination of the victim was done on and the victim has also stated that on the same date, the accused 15 committed penetrative sexual assault on her, due to which, from the statements of this witness, Dr. Mrs. B. Tigga, irrefutable evidence of having sexual intercourse with the victim is obtained. 28. As per above, the statement of the victim in which she has said that the accused had sexual intercourse with her on 31/03/2019 in the house of the accused, which is supported by the statements of Dr. B. Tigga and the finding of human sperm on the panties of the victim in the FSL test and the victim immediately informing her mother about the incident proves beyond doubt that the accused had committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim. 29. Therefore, on evaluation of the entire evidence mentioned above, it is proved beyond doubt that the accused Suraj Nirmalkar had committed penetrative sexual assault with the victim on the date of incident. 30. The Supreme Court in the matter of Rai Sandeep @ Deenu v. State of NCT of Delhi, 2012 (8) SCC 21 held as under:- “22. In our considered opinion, the ‘sterling witness’ should be of a very high quality and caliber whose version should, therefore, be unassailable. The Court considering the version of such witness should be in a position to accept it for its face value without any hesitation. To test the quality of such a witness, the status of the witness would be immaterial and what would be relevant is the truthfulness of the statement made by such a witness. What would be more relevant would be the consistency of the statement right from 16 the starting point till the end, namely, at the time when the witness makes the initial statement and ultimately before the Court. It should be natural and consistent with the case of the prosecution qua the accused. There should not be any prevarication in the version of such a witness. The witness should be in a position to withstand the cross-examination of any length and howsoever strenuous it may be and under no circumstance should give room for any doubt as to the factum of the occurrence, the persons involved, as well as, the sequence of it. Such a version should have co-relation with each and everyone of other supporting material such as the recoveries made, the weapons used, the manner of offence committed, the scientific evidence and the expert opinion. The said version should consistently match with the version of every other witness. It can even be stated that it should be akin to the test applied in the case of circumstantial evidence where there should not be any missing link in the chain of circumstances to hold the accused guilty of the offence alleged against him. Only if the version of such a witness qualifies the above test as well as all other similar such tests to be applied, it can be held that such a witness can be called as a ‘sterling witness’ whose version can be accepted by the Court without any corroboration and based on which the guilty can be punished. To be more precise, the version of the said witness on the core spectrum of the crime should remain intact while all other attendant materials, namely, oral, documentary and material objects should match the said version in material particulars in order to enable the Court trying the offence to rely on the core version to sieve the other 17 supporting materials for holding the offender guilty of the charge alleged.” 31. In the matter of Alakh Alok Srivastava v. Union of India & Ors., (2018) 17 SCC 291, in paras 14 and 20, it is observed as under: “14. At the very outset, it has to be stated with authority that the Pocso Act is a gender legislation. This Act has been divided into various chapters and parts therein. Chapter II of the Act titled “Sexual Offences Against Children” is segregated into five parts. Part A of the said Chapter contains two sections, namely, Section 3 and Section 4. Section 3 defines the offence of “Penetrative Sexual Assault” whereas Section 4 lays down the punishment for the said offence. Likewise, Part B of the said Chapter titled “Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault and Punishment therefor” contains two sections, namely, Section 5 and Section 6. The various subsections of Section 5 copiously deal with various situations, circumstances and categories of persons where the offence of penetrative sexual assault would take the character of the offence of aggravated penetrative sexual assault. Section 5(k), in particular, while laying emphasis on the mental stability of a child stipulates that where an offender commits penetrative sexual assault on a child, by taking advantage of the child's mental or physical disability, it shall amount to an offence of aggravated penetrative sexual assault.” “20. Speaking about the child, a three Judge Bench in M.C. Mehta v. State of T.N. (1996) 6 SCC 756 “1. … “child is the father of man”. To enable fathering of a 18 valiant and vibrant man, the child must be groomed well in the formative years of his life. He must receive education, acquire knowledge of man and materials and blossom in such an atmosphere that on reaching age, he is found to be a man with a mission, a man who matters so far as the society is concerned.” 32. The Supreme Court in the matter of Nawabuddin v. State of Uttarakhand (CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.144 OF 2022), decided on 8.2.2022 has held as under:- “10. Keeping in mind the aforesaid objects and to achieve what has been provided under Article 15 and 39 of the Constitution to protect children from the offences of sexual assault, sexual harassment, the POCSO Act, 2012 has been enacted. Any act of sexual assault or sexual harassment to the children should be viewed very seriously and all such offences of sexual assault, sexual harassment on the children have to be dealt with in a stringent manner and no leniency should be shown to a person who has committed the offence under the POCSO Act. By awarding a suitable punishment commensurate with the act of sexual assault, sexual harassment, a message must be conveyed to the society at large that, if anybody commits any offence under the POCSO Act of sexual assault, sexual harassment or use of children for pornographic purposes they shall be punished suitably and no leniency shall be shown to them. Cases of sexual assault or sexual harassment on the children are instances of perverse lust for sex where even innocent children are not spared in pursuit of such debased sexual pleasure. 19 Children are precious human resources of our country; they are the country’s future. The hope of tomorrow rests on them. But unfortunately, in our country, a girl child is in a very vulnerable position. There are different modes of her exploitation, including sexual assault and/or sexual abuse. In our view, exploitation of children in such a manner is a crime against humanity and the society. Therefore, the children and more particularly the girl child deserve full protection and need greater care and protection whether in the urban or rural areas. As observed and held by this Court in the case of State of Rajasthan v. Om Prakash, (2002) 5 SCC 745, children need special care and protection and, in such cases, responsibility on the shoulders of the Courts is more onerous so as to provide proper legal protection to these children. In the case of Nipun Saxena v. Union of India, (2019) 2 SCC 703, it is observed by this Court that a minor who is subjected to sexual abuse needs to be protected even more than a major victim because a major victim being an adult may still be able to withstand the social ostracization and mental harassment meted out by society, but a minor victim will find it difficult to do so. Most crimes against minor victims are not even reported as very often, the perpetrator of the crime is a member of the family of the victim or a close friend. Therefore, the child needs extra protection. Therefore, no leniency can be shown to an accused who has committed the offences under the POCSO Act, 2012 and particularly when the same is proved by adequate evidence before a court of law.” 20 33. When considering the evidence of a victim subjected to a sexual offence, the Court does not necessarily demand an almost accurate account of the incident. Instead, the emphasis is on allowing the victim to provide her version based on her recollection of events, to the extent reasonably possible for her to recollect. If the Court deems such evidence credible and free from doubt, there is hardly any insistence on corroboration of that version. In State of H.P. v. Shree Kant Shekar (2004) 8 SCC 153 the Hon‟ble Supreme Court held as follows:“ “21. It is well settled that a prosecutrix complaining of having been a victim of the offence of rape is not an accomplice after the crime. There is no rule of law that her testimony cannot be acted without corroboration in material particulars. She stands on a higher pedestal than an injured witness. In the latter case, there is injury on the physical form, while in the former it is physical as well as psychological and emotional. However, if the court on facts finds it difficult to accept the version of the prosecutrix on its face value, it may search for evidence, direct or circumstantial, which would lend assurance to her testimony. Assurance, short of corroboration, as understood in the context of an accomplice, would suffice.” 34. On these lines, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Shivasharanappa and Others v. State of Karnataka, (2013) 5 SCC 705 observed as follows: 21 “17. Thus, it is well settled in law that the court can rely upon the testimony of a child witness and it can form the basis of conviction if the same is credible, truthful and is corroborated by other evidence brought on record. Needless to say as a rule of prudence, the court thinks it desirable to see the corroboration from other reliable evidence placed on record. The principles that apply for placing reliance on the solitary statement of the witness, namely, that the statement is true and correct and is of quality and cannot be discarded solely on the ground of lack of corroboration, apply to a child witness who is competent and whose version is reliable.” 35. The Supreme court in the matter of State of UP v. Sonu Kushwaha, (2023) 7 SCC 475 has held as under : “12. The POCSO Act was enacted to provide more stringent punishments for the offences of child abuse of various kinds and that is why minimum punishments have been prescribed in Sections 4, 6, 8 and 10 of the POCSO Act for various categories of sexual assaults on children. Hence, Section 6,on its plain language, leaves no discretion to the Court and there is no option but to impose the minimum sentence as done by the Trial Court. When a penal provision uses the phraseology “shall not be less than….”, the Courts cannot do offence to the Section and impose a lesser sentence. The Courts are powerless to do that unless 22 there is a specific statutory provision enabling the Court to impose a lesser sentence. However, we find no such provision in the POCSO Act. Therefore, notwithstanding the fact that the respondent may have moved ahead in life after undergoing the sentence as modified by the High Court, there is no question of showing any leniency to him. Apart from the fact that the law provides for a minimum sentence, the crime committed by the respondent is very gruesome which calls for very stringent punishment. The impact of the obnoxious act on the mind of the victim/child will be lifelong. The impact is bound to adversely affect the healthy growth of the victim. There is no dispute that the age of the victim was less than twelve years at the time of the incident. Therefore, we have no option but to set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court and restore the judgment of the Trial Court.” 36. On the basis of analysis of evidence presented by the prosecution, it is evident that at the time of the incident, the victim was a minor below 18 years of age. It is proved that the victim is a girl child and that the accused, knowing that the victim was a girl child below 18 years of age at the time of the incident, committed the crime of rape, forcible penetration, sexual assault and rape on the girl/victim below 18 years of age. Thus, the said crime of rape, penetrative sexual assault on a minor girl below 18 years of age by the accused falls under the category of aggravated penetrative sexual assault. 37. Lastly, considering the statement of the victim (PW-1) who has specifically stated the act of the present appellant, statement of 23 her mother (PW-2), father of the victim (PW-3), Inspector Shri S.C. Shukla (PW-6), Medical Officer Dr. R.P.S. Kanwar (PW-7), Medical Officer Dr. Mrs. B. Tigga (PW-8), FSL report (Ex.P/21) wherein human sperm was found on the panties of the victim (Article-A) and MLC (Ex.P-3) wherein injuries were found on the body of the victim, the material available on record and the principle of law laid down by the Supreme Court in the above- stated judgments, we are of the considered opinion that the learned Special Judge has rightly convicted the appellant for offence under under Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. We do not find any illegality and irregularity in the findings recorded by the trial Court. 38. In the result, this Court comes to the conclusion that the prosecution has succeeded in proving its case beyond all reasonable doubts against the appellant. The conviction and sentence as awarded by the trial court to the appellant is hereby upheld. The present criminal appeal lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. 39. It is stated at the Bar that the appellant is in jail. He shall serve out the sentence as ordered by the trial Court. 40. Registry is directed to send a copy of this judgment to the concerned Superintendent of Jail where the Appellant is undergoing the jail term, to serve the same on the Appellant informing him that he is at liberty to assail the present judgment 24 passed by this Court by preferring an appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court with the assistance of High Court Legal Services Committee or the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Manpreet