1 2025:CGHC:53808-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 951 of 2025 Aman Adil S/o Late Tarachand Adil Aged About 52 Years R/o Rohnipuram, D.D. Nagar, P.S. - D.D. Nagar, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Appellant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Station House Officer, P.S. - D.D. Nagar, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Appellant(s) : Mr. Siddharth Rathod, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 04.11.2025 1. This criminal appeal under Section 415(2) of the BNSS is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08.04.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge 1st Fast Track, Special Court (POCSO) Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) in Special Criminal Case (POCSO) No. MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2025.11.06 10:49:48 +0530 2 194/2022, by which the appellant herein has been convicted for offences as under:- Conviction under Section Sentence (Rigorous imprisonment) Fine In default of payment of fine R.I. Section 363 of the IPC 5 years Rs. 1000/- 02 months Section 366 of the IPC 7 years Rs.1000/- 02 month Section 342 of the IPC 1 year Rs.1000/- 02 months Section 506 of the IPC 1 year Rs.1000/- 02 months Section 5(l), 5(m) / 6 of POCSO Act Life imprisonment till natural death Rs. 1000/- 02 months All sentences have been directed to run concurrently. 2. Learned State counsel submits that notice issued to PW-2 i.e. father of the victim has been served. 3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that Mrs. Ratna Dubey (PW-3), Superintendent of the Government Girls' Home, Khamhardih, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, submitted counseling reports dated 26.05.2022, 28.05.2022, and 31.05.2022 (Exhibit P-10C, Exhibit P-11C, and Exhibit P-12C, respectively) to the Deendayal Nagar Police Station, along with a letter (Exhibit P-05) regarding the registration of an FIR. According to the counseling reports dated 26.05.2022, 28.05.2022, and 31.05.2022, the girl/victim was upset 3 about something in February 2022 and left to visit her uncle and aunt in their village. On the way, accused Aman Adil and his associates, seeing the girl walking without slippers, near the Ayurvedic College, Anupam Garden, followed the victim. The accused forcibly made the girl sit on his bike and H\he began touching and engaging in obscene acts. The accused left the girl on the main road of the village and fled with his accomplice. After the girl returned from the village, the accused began monitoring her every activity. He deceived the girl's parents by claiming to work for an NGO, teaching children, and began visiting their home. In February 2022, the accused, claiming to be taking the girl to an abandoned house near Gayatri Hospital, forcibly subjected her to physical and sexual abuse. When the girl refused, he threatened to kill her parents. Counseling also revealed that the accused had engaged in sexual intercourse with the victim multiple times. Based on the above facts, charges were filed against the accused under sections 363, 343, 506, 376(3), 376(2)(d) of the Indian Penal Code and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The crime was taken up for investigation by registering a First Information Report (Exhibit P- 22) under Section 6 of the IPC. 4. During the investigation, the consent of the victim and the Superintendent of the Government Children's Home (Girls), Khamhardih, Raipur, was obtained as per Exhibit P-02 and Exhibit P-07 and the medical examination of the victim was conducted at 4 AIIMS Hospital, Raipur on 01.10.2022. According to the medical examination report of the victim, Exhibit P-14, no marks of sexual intercourse were found on the body of the victim, but the possibility of penetrative sexual assault cannot be ruled out. According to the history given by the victim regarding the incident, it has been said that the tear present in her hymen matches. 5. Statements were recorded from the victim and other witnesses under Section 161 of the CrPC. Thereafter, the police prepared a site map of the scene (Ex.P-1), the Patwari obtained the report. A site map of the incident was also prepared. On 06.10.2022, the statement of the victim was recorded before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur under Section 164 CrPC. On 01.10.2022, as per the arrest memo Exhibit P-23, the accused was arrested and his medical examination was conducted at AIIMS Hospital, Raipur. As per the medical examination report of the accused Exhibit P-17, it was opined that nothing was found in the examination of the accused which could suggest that he was incapable of establishing physical relations. 6. During the investigation, a true copy of the admission-cancellation register of the school of the victim, Exhibit P-20C, was obtained regarding her age, according to which the date of birth of the victim was mentioned as 09.09.2010, hence the age of the victim was found to be less than 12 and 18 years at the time of the incident. 5 7. On thorough investigation, it was found that in February 2022, the victim, being angry with her parents, went to her grandmother's house and While she was going to the village on foot, when two persons asked her near Anupam Garden, the victim told them her name and also told them that she was going to her grandmother's place. Then both the men took her on their motorcycle to her grandmother's village, where when the victim's uncle saw her and questioned her, they left her and ran away. When the victim's uncle called the victim's father, the victim's father came to the village and brought the victim with him to Raipur. Two days later, one of the two men came to the victim's house and started talking to her. He introduced himself as working in an NGO and started visiting her house. Then the victim came to know that the man's name was the accused Aman Adil. Saying that he would teach the children, the accused took the victim for a walk with him to an empty house near Gayatri Hospital on the way to Sanjivani Hospital towards Pachpedi Naka and forcibly removed the victim's clothes. When the victim screamed, he gagged her and forcibly had sex with her. He threatened to kill her and her parents if she told anyone about the incident. Consequently, the victim did not report the incident to anyone. On February 22, 2022, while leaving school after school, the accused, Aman Adil, forcibly took her on his motorcycle, promising to take her for a ride towards Naya Raipur, and forcibly had intercourse with her. When the victim's father learned of the incident, he brought her from village Nemora 6 and took her to DD Nagar police station, claiming she had left home without informing anyone. The victim, frightened, was running away from the police station when the accused was found near Raipura Chowk. The accused took her with him and kept her locked in someone's house for six days, having sex with her daily. The victim then fled to her lover, Vidhi. She went to Danapur Medical Colony, Patna, to meet the struggling teenager. From there, on 30.03.2022, police from DD Nagar Police Station brought the victim back to Raipur. After a thorough investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the accused in court under sections 363, 343, 506, 376(3), 376(2)(d) of the Indian Penal Code and section 6 of the POCSO Act 8. In order to establish the charge against the appellant, the prosecution examined as many as 09 witnesses and exhibited the documents (Exs.P-1 to P-25). 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. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned judgment, conviction and sentence dated 08.04.2025 awarded by the trial Court is bad in law, perverse, thus liable to be set aside. The judgment of conviction and the order of sentence passed by the learned trial Court are patently illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the settled principles of criminal jurisprudence. It is urged that the 7 prosecution has utterly failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, yet the learned trial Court has proceeded to convict the appellant merely on the basis of assumptions, presumptions and surmises, ignoring material contradictions, omissions and inconsistencies in the testimony of the prosecution witnesses, particularly with respect to the age of the victim, which has neither been proved by reliable documentary evidence nor by credible oral evidence. It is further submitted that there is an unexplained and inordinate delay in lodging the FIR, which clearly indicates that the case is an afterthought and motivated by personal vendetta, as the victim and her parents did not approach the police immediately, and only after counselling the report was lodged. It is further argued that the victim was admittedly recovered from Danapur, Bihar, from the company of one Vidhi with whom she had a love affair, yet no action was initiated against him, thereby exposing the biased, unfair and tainted investigation conducted only to falsely implicate the appellant. The learned counsel further submits that the prosecution has prepared documents at the police station without proper investigation, which constitutes abuse of process and violates the appellant’s right to fair trial. It is further contended that material defence evidence and documents produced by the appellant were completely ignored and the trial Court failed to appreciate that the initial complaint was against another individual, but due to phonetic similarity, the appellant was falsely implicated. It is also 8 urged that the conviction is based solely on examination-in-chief, without due consideration of cross-examination bringing out substantial contradictions and omissions fatal to the prosecution case. It is further submitted that the learned trial Court has erroneously presumed the victim to be under 12 years, despite the prosecution’s failure to prove her age from school records beyond reasonable doubt. The defence version that the appellant had advanced Rs.50,000 as a loan to the victim’s father, leading to false implication when repayment was demanded, has also been disregarded without any lawful justification. In view of these facts, it is contended that the appellant has been falsely implicated, the impugned judgment suffers from serious infirmities and perversity, the appellant is languishing in jail, resulting in violation of his fundamental rights and even otherwise, the punishment imposed is grossly disproportionate and unsustainable in the eyes of law. 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 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. 9 11. Learned State Counsel would further contend that minor discrepancies or contradictions in the statements of witnesses cannot be made a ground to discard the entire prosecution case, particularly when the substratum of the prosecution story remains intact. The prosecution witnesses, including the victim and her close relatives, have consistently deposed about the incident and supported the prosecution version, which clearly establishes the guilt of the appellant. Further, the medical evidence, coupled with the prompt lodging of the FIR and the victim’s statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., lends full assurance to the case of the prosecution. The delay, if any, in investigation or minor lapses by the police cannot enure to the benefit of the accused when the core evidence on record clearly proves the charge. The trial Court has passed a well-reasoned judgment after appreciating the evidence in its correct perspective, and the findings recorded do not call for any interference in appeal. The seriousness of the offence and the circumstances in which it was committed further justify the sentence imposed. 12. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 13. The issue that arises for consideration in the present appeal is whether the testimony of the victim/prosecutrix deserves acceptance and whether the prosecution has established the case of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. 10 14. 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. 15. 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. 16. Regarding the age of the victim, the prosecution has relied upon the certified copy of the admission and dismissal register of the victim’s school for Class-II, marked as Exhibit P-20C. The original admission and dismissal register is Exhibit P-20. As per entry no. 1035 in the said register, the date of birth of the victim is recorded as 09.09.2010. 17. The Principal of the school (PW-7) supported the above entry and stated that as per the school records, the date of birth of the victim is 09.09.2010. He also stated that the victim was admitted in Class-II. However, in cross-examination, PW-7 admitted that the entry in Exhibit P-20 is not in his handwriting. It is also a fact that no admission register or certificate relating to Class-I of the victim has been produced by the prosecution. Apart from the school 11 register, no other documentary evidence such as birth certificate or hospital record of birth has been adduced. In such circumstances, the school admission register alone cannot be treated as conclusive proof of age, yet it is a relevant and admissible piece of evidence which may be relied upon along with other supporting evidence. 18. The date of birth recorded in Exhibit P-20C shows that the victim was born on 09.09.2010. The incident is alleged to have occurred between December 2021 and February 2022. Thus, from 09.09.2010 to 09.09.2022, the victim attains the age of 12 years. Therefore, during the period of incident, her age would be between 11 and 12 years. The Court also noted the physical appearance of the victim at the time of her deposition on 19.07.2023 and estimated her age to be approximately 13 years. This observation further corroborates the school record. 19. The victim (PW-1), in her deposition, stated her date of birth as 09.09.2010 and stated that she was around 12 years old at the time of the incident. Her father (PW-2) also affirmed the same date of birth, stating that the victim was about 11-12 years at the relevant time. Significantly, the defence did not challenge these statements in cross-examination. In the absence of challenge, there is no reason to disbelieve the date of birth stated by the victim and her father. 12 20. It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jarnail Singh vs State of Haryana (2013) 7 SCC 263, whereby it has been determined that the age of the victim in POCSO cases shall be determined as per the provision mentioned in Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act 2015 on the basis of Rule 12 (3) of the POCSO Rules, 2007. 21. Sub-section (2) of Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act 2015 provides that – 94(2)- In case, 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, 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 (1) 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 13 or the Board shall be completed within fifteen days from the date of such order. 22. Therefore, in the light of the principle propounded by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgment of Jarnail Singh (supra), it is clear that the school admission register, the oral evidence of the victim and her father, and the Court’s own assessment of her physical appearance all consistently indicate that the victim was under 12 years of age on the date of occurrence. 23. Accordingly, the prosecution has successfully established that the victim was below 18 years of age, and in fact below 12 years of age, at the time of the incident. The finding of the learned trial Court on this issue, therefore, calls for no interference and is affirmed. 24. Now, next question for consideration is whether the appellant committed rape with the prosecutrix / victim girl was a minor girl less than 15 years of age on the date of incident. 25. In this regard, the victim (PW-1), in her deposition, stated that she was acquainted with the accused. On 03.12.2021, while she was leaving her house without informing her family members and proceeding towards her grandmother's village, the accused intercepted her on the way and forcibly took her in a vehicle towards village Gullu. Around the same time, her uncle was expected to arrive, and her uncle informed her father about her whereabouts. The victim (PW-1) further stated that on the second 14 or third day after this incident, the accused came to her residence at Raipur and disclosed her location to her parents. Thereafter, he developed acquaintance with her parents and began visiting the house frequently. The documentary and oral evidence establishes that the accused gained the confidence of the victim's family. 26. The victim (PW-1) further deposed that on 03.02.2022, the accused came to her residence and informed her father that he would take her for psychiatric treatment, to which her father consented. At about 6:00 p.m., the accused took her to Gayatri Hospital and thereafter subjected her to sexual assault near the hospital premises. She further stated that the accused also threatened to kill her parents if she disclosed the incident. Due to fear, she did not reveal the incident immediately and later informed the teacher at the Girls’ Home, following which a report was lodged. 27. The statement of the victim clearly narrates the material particulars of the incident. Minor inconsistencies regarding date or time do not undermine the core of the prosecution case, particularly when this Court has already held that the victim was below 13 years of age at the time of the occurrence. In cases involving child victims, minor variations are natural and do not detract from credibility. 28. The victim was extensively cross-examined. She denied the suggestion that her father had borrowed money from the accused 15 and that the case was falsely lodged on that account. Nothing material was elicited in cross-examination to create doubt upon her testimony. 29. The testimony of the father of the victim (PW-2) corroborates her evidence. He stated that on 03.12.2021, the victim had left home without intimation and later the accused came to his house and informed him that the child had gone to village Gullu. He further stated that the accused frequently visited their residence, represented that he would take the child for psychiatric consultation, and thereafter sexually assaulted her. 30. Importantly, PW-2, in his cross-examination, adhered to the narrative and denied the suggestion of false implication. The suggestion that the victim did not disclose the incident to him was categorically denied. No suggestion of enmity or motive to falsely implicate the accused has been proven. 31. The identification of the accused by the victim and her father is firm and consistent. The discrepancy regarding the surname of the accused is immaterial when both primary witnesses have clearly identified him in Court and during investigation. Such minor variation cannot overshadow the clear, cogent and reliable testimony of a child witness supported by parental corroboration. 32. Smt. Ratna Dubey (PW-3), Superintendent of the Children's Home, deposed that the victim was admitted to the institution on 01.04.2022 and during counseling sessions she disclosed that 16 she had been sexually assaulted by the appellant. Smt. Varsha Sharma (PW-4) the counselor, also confirmed that during counseling the victim disclosed the name of the appellant, initially as Aman and later as Aman Adil. This minor confusion in surname was clarified and is inconsequential. The evidence of PW-3 and PW-4 lends further assurance to the testimony of the victim. 33. In cases involving child victims, minor inconsistencies cannot undermine credible testimony, particularly when the victim, due to her tender age, is expected to narrate the incident in a manner consistent with her mental maturity. The victim has narrated the essential facts of sexual assault, and her testimony inspires confidence. 34. Thus, the consistent evidence of the victim (PW-1), corroborated by her father (PW-2) and supported by the testimony of the Superintendent (PW-3) and Counselor of the Children's Home (PW-4), clearly establishes that the appellant committed sexual assault upon the minor victim. The argument of the defence regarding discrepancy in the surname of the appellant does not hold merit. Both the victim (PW-1) and her father (PW-2) have clearly identified the appellant in Court. Once identity is established beyond doubt, such minor discrepancies lose significance. 35. Now coming to the medical evidence adduced by the prosecution, it is noted that the victim was medically examined by Dr. Gauri 17 Gopal V.R. (PW-5) on 01.10.2022. The doctor has deposed that during the course of examination, the victim narrated the incident to him in detail, stating that the accused had taken her near Gayatri Hospital and subjected her to forcible sexual intercourse on more than one occasion, while also threatening her with dire consequences. The doctor has recorded the said history in the MLC report. PW-5 has further stated that on local examination, the hymen of the victim was found torn at the 5 o’clock and 9 o’clock positions. Though no external injuries were found on the body or genital region, the medical expert clearly opined that the hymenal tear was consistent with the history given by the victim and that the possibility of penetrative sexual assault could not be ruled out. 36. It is pertinent to note that even in the cross-examination, the defence could not impeach the testimony of the medical officer, and in fact, it was suggested by the defence itself that the medical report only reflects the victim’s history as narrated by her. The medical evidence therefore, though not showing fresh injuries, corroborates the version of the victim to the extent that she was subjected to penetrative sexual assault. It is well-settled that absence of external injuries, particularly in cases involving minor victims, does not by itself discredit the prosecution case, especially when the victim’s testimony is consistent and trustworthy. 18 37. In view of the above medical evidence, coupled with the consistent statement of the victim and the corroboration received from the counselling testimony of the Child Care Institution witnesses, we find no reason to doubt the occurrence as alleged by the prosecution. 38. Now, coming to the FSL evidence adduced by the prosecution, on perusal of the FSL report placed on record, it is noticed that no semen, spermatozoa or DNA of the accused was detected on the vaginal swab, clothing of the victim, or any other material submitted for examination. The report reflects that the biological samples did not yield any conclusive forensic material connecting the accused with the alleged act of sexual assault. It is relevant to note that absence of semen or DNA on the exhibits, in a case of sexual assault committed on a minor child, particularly where there is a time-gap between the incident and medical examination as well as sample collection, is not fatal to the prosecution case. The FSL report does not negate the ocular testimony of the prosecutrix, especially when the victim is a minor and her testimony, supported by medical findings of hymenal tear consistent with sexual assault, inspires confidence. Therefore, the negative forensic report, by itself, does not demolish the prosecution version, particularly in the facts of the present case. 39. It is well-settled that in cases of sexual assault, especially involving a minor victim, the testimony of the prosecutrix, if found 19 trustworthy and supported by medical indications, is sufficient to sustain conviction even in the absence of positive FSL findings. 40. 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 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 20 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 supporting materials for holding the offender guilty of the charge alleged.” 41. 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” 21 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 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.” 42. 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 22 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. 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 23 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.” 43. 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 24 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.” 44. On these lines, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Shivasharanappa and Others v. State of Karnataka, (2013) 5 SCC 705 observed as follows: “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.” 25 45. 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 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.” 26 46. On the basis of analysis of evidence presented by the prosecution, it is evident that date of birth of the victim is 09.09.2010 and on the date of incident i.e. between December 2021 and February 2022, the victim attains the age of 12 years which is less than 13 years at the time of the incident. It is proved that the victim is a girl child and that the accused, knowing that the victim was a girl child below 13 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 13 years of age. Thus, the said crime of rape, penetrative sexual assault on a minor girl below 13 years of age by the accused falls under the category of aggravated penetrative sexual assault. 47. Lastly, considering the statement of the victim (PW-1) who has specifically stated the act of the present appellant, statement of the father of the victim (PW-2), statement of Superintendent of the Children's Home (PW-3), statement of counselor (PW-4), statement of medical officer Dr. Gauri Gopta V.R. (PW-5) and 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 offences under under Sections 363, 366, 342, 506 of the IPC and Section5(l), 5(m) / 6 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. 27 48. The testimony of the victim, a minor below 12 years of age, is consistent, cogent and inspires confidence. Her version of sexual assault has remained unshaken in cross-examination and has received substantial corroboration from the statements of the Superintendent (PW-3) and Counsellor of the Children's Home (PW-4), to whom she disclosed the incident at the earliest counselling opportunity. 49. The medical evidence, particularly the hymenal tear consistent with the history narrated by the child victim, further supports the prosecution case. The absence of seminal findings does not dent the prosecution case, particularly in light of the settled principle that conviction can be based on the sole testimony of the victim if it is trustworthy and inspires confidence, even in the absence of direct medical corroboration. The defence plea regarding the victim's presence at Danapur, Bihar, has rightly been disbelieved, as the record demonstrates that the sexual assault alleged against the appellant occurred prior to her visit to Bihar, and no suggestion was put to the victim to discredit this aspect. the victim's presence at Danapur, Bihar, has rightly been disbelieved, as the record demonstrates that the sexual assault alleged against the appellant occurred prior to her visit to Bihar, and no suggestion was put to the victim to discredit this aspect. 50. Child witnesses often narrate facts in simple terms, without technical accuracy or chronological precision. Minor 28 inconsistencies, if any, are therefore natural and do not go to the root of the prosecution case. In the present matter, the testimony of the victim carries the inherent mark of truth and bears no indication of tutoring or fabrication. She had no motive to falsely implicate the appellant, and the defence has failed to establish even a remote possibility of false implication 51. This Court is satisfied that the prosecution has proved, beyond reasonable doubt, that the appellant kidnapped and wrongfully confined the minor child and committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon her, while threatening her with dire consequences. The findings recorded by the learned trial Court on each charge, including those under the POCSO Act and IPC, are well-reasoned and supported by evidence. No material has been produced by the appellant to dislodge the prosecution case or to create any reasonable doubt. 52. 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. 53. It is stated at the Bar that the appellant is in jail. He shall serve out the sentence as ordered by the trial Court. 29 54. 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 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. 55. Let a copy of this judgment and the original record be transmitted to the trial Court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Manpreet