1 CGHC010395572025 2026:CGHC:29578-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1870 of 2025 Shahid @ Chishti Ansari S/o Reyajuddin Ansari Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Mahaveerganj, Police Chowki Vijaynagar, Police Station Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Chowki Vijaynagar, Police Station Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) --- Respondent (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Appellant : Mr. Arham Siddiqui, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri R avi ndra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 14/07/2026 1. Learned counsel for the State submitted that the notice issued to PW-2, the father of the victim, has been served upon him on 01.01.2026, however no one appears on his behalf to make his submission. VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2026.07.20 11:04:20 +0530 2 2. Although the matter has been listed for consideration on I.A. No. 1 of 2025 (application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail), however considering the fact that the appellant is in jail since 28.07.2022, with the consent of the parties, the appeal has been heard finally and I.A. No.1 of 2025 is disposed of. 3. The present criminal appeal under Section 415(2) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (in short ‘BNSS’) has been preferred by the appellant assailing the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29.08.2025, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court (POCSO Act), Ramanujganj, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj, in Special Sessions Case (POCSO) No. 77 of 2022, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentence in the following manner:- Conviction Sentence U/s. 6 of POCSO Act. R.I. for 20 years and fine amount of Rs.20,000/-, in default of payment of fine amount, further R.I. for 06 months. U/s. 313 of I.P.C. R.I. for 10 years and fine amount of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine amount, further R.I. for 06 months. U/s. 506 Part II of I.P.C. R.I. for 03 years and fine amount of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine amount, further R.I for 01 month U/s. 509-B of I.P.C. R.I. for 01 year and fine amount of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine amount, further R.I for 01 month U/s. 67 of Information Technology Act, 2000. R.I. for 01 year and fine amount of Rs.20,000/-, in default of payment of fine amount, further R.I for 01 month 3 U/s. 376(2)(n) of IPC No separate sentence has been awarded. All the sentences are directed to run concurrently. Sentences in default of payment of fine, shall run separately. 4. The case of the prosecution is that, the victim (PW-1) lodged a written complaint to the police on 27.07.2022 with the allegation that, while studying in the school in the year 2021-22, she came into contact with the appellant, and they started chatting in mobile phone. In the month of November 2021, he took her towards Higher Secondary School and on the pretext of marriage made forceful sexual intercourse despite her protest. From November 2021 till April 2022, he repeated made sexual intercourse with her at different places. When the act of the appellant become unbearable, she informed her parents and then lodged the report. Based on the written complaint (exhibit P-1) FIR (exhibit P-2) was registered against the appellant for the offence under Section 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act. The victim was sent for her medical examination to Community Health Centre, Ramanujganj where she was medically examined by Dr. Sakshi Nag (PW-9), who gave her report (exhibit P-14). While medically examining the victim, no external injuries were found on her body, her hymen was old ruptured. She opined that no any definite opinion can be given about recent sexual intercourse. Two slides of vaginal swab was preserved, sealed and handed over to the police for its chemical examination. Spot map (exhibit P-3) was prepared by the police and exhibit P-17 was prepared by the patwari. 4 5. With respect to the age and date of birth of the victim, the police has seized school register (exhibit P-9) vide seizure memo (exhibit P-8) and after retaining its attested true copy (exhibit P-9C), the original register was returned back to the school. As per the school register, the date of birth of the victim is 05.01.2005. The statement of the victim under Section 164 CRPC has been recorded, in which she alleged that the appellant has also prepared her obscene videos and threatened her to get it viral in social media, therefore, she could not disclosed the incident to anyone due to prospective apprehension of defamation. She also alleged that somewhere in the month of April and May, she conceived pregnancy and then the appellant gave her pills to abort her pregnancy and forced to swallow it. He defamed her by uploading her obscene videos in instagram and whatsapp. The mobile phone of the victim has also been seized, in which her obscene photos were sent by the appellant and screenshot of the said obscene photos have also been seized vide seizure memo (exhibit P-5). The appellant was arrested on 28.02.2022 and he too was sent for his medical examination to Community Health Centre, Ramanujganj, where Dr. Sharad Chandra Gupta (PW-10) medically examined him, who gave his report (exhibit P-15). While medically examining the appellant, the doctor has not notice any external injuries and found him capable to perform sexual intercourse. The mobile phone of the appellant has also been seized vide seizure memo (exhibit P-7) and his underwear has been seized vide seizure memo (exhibit P-11). The underwear of the applicant was sent for its query report to the doctor, who preferred for its chemical examination by query report (exhibit P-16). The vaginal slide of the victim and the 5 underwear of the appellant were sent for its chemical examination to Regional FSL Ambikapur, District Surguja from where report (exhibit P-13) was received and no any semen or sperms were found on the sent articles. The mobile phones of the victim as well as appellant were also sent to the Cyber Forensic Lab, Police Headquarter, Raipur, from where reports (exhibit P-21 and P-22) were received and certain obscene videos and photographs were recovered from the sent mobile phones. The CAF of the mobile phone of the appellant and certificate under Section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (exhibit P-18, P-19 and P-20, respectively) have been obtained by the police from its service provider company. Statements of the witnesses under Section 161 of the CRPC have been recorded, and after completion of usual investigation, charge sheet for the offence under Sections 376(2)(n), 509-B, 313 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’), Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short ‘POCSO Act’) and Section 67-A of Information Technology Act, 2000 (in short ‘IT Act’) has been filed before the learned trial Court. 6. The learned trial Court framed charge against the appellant for the offence under Sections 376(2)(n), 506 Part-II, 313, 509-B of IPC, Section 6 of POCSO Act and Section 67 of IT Act. The appellant denied the charge and claimed trial. 7. In order to prove the charges, the prosecution examined as many as 14 witnesses. Statement of the appellant under Section 313 CRPC has also been recorded, in which he denied all the incriminating circumstances appears against him, pleaded innocence and 6 submitted that he has been falsely implicated in the offence to create pressure upon him to marry with the victim. 8. After appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, the learned trial Court has convicted the appellant and sentence him, as mentioned in the earlier part of this judgment. Hence this appeal. 9. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that, the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. There are material omissions and contradictions in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, which cannot be made basis to convict the appellant in the offence in question. There is no cogent evidence with respect to the age of the victim that she was minor and less than 18 years of age on the date of incident. As per her own allegation, she continued in physical relation with the appellant from November 2021 to April 2022, which is sufficient to hold that the victim was engaged in consensual physical relation with the appellant. Had she been subjected to forceful sexual intercourse by the appellant, she would have lodged the report immediately. There is no injury or sign of any protest has been found on the body of the victim and even no sperm or semen were found on her vaginal slide. With respect to the obscene videos recovered from the mobile phone of the victim and the appellant, he would submit that the electronic evidence has not been proved by the prosecution in accordance with law and the same is inadmissible and cannot be relied for conviction of the appellant. The safe custody of the mobile phones have not been proved by the prosecution. No any CDR has been produced by the prosecution and the data recovered from the alleged mobile phone are not sufficient 7 to hold that the appellant uploaded the obscene videos and photos of the victim in the mobile phone. He would further submit that there is no evidence on record that the appellant force-fed the pills for her abortion. In her medical examination also, no sign of any abortion was noticed by the doctor. Therefore, in such inconsistent evidence and material the appellant is entitled for acquittal by giving him benefit of doubt. 10. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant and would submit that, the prosecution has duly proved the allegation against the appellant. But for minor omission or contradiction, the evidence of prosecution witnesses are reliable and sufficient to hold the appellant guilty for the alleged offence. The evidence of the victim alone is sufficient and not required for any corroboration, as she duly supported the prosecution’s case. From the evidence of victim, the manner in which she was sexually exploited by the appellant on the pretext of marriage as well as on the threat of defame her by uploading her obscene videos and photographs in social media has been proved. Even if no injury has been found on the body of the victim, that itself is not sufficient to discredit her evidence, as the injuries on the body of the victim is not necessary to be noticed. He would further submit that, from the evidence of Cyber expert and report from Cyber Forensic Lab, the presence of obscene videos and photographs in the mobile phones of the victim, which was uploaded from the mobile phone of the appellant has also been proved by relevant and admissible evidence. The evidence of the victim though 8 not required for any corroboration, yet her evidence is corroborated with other evidences and the learned trial Court after having considered the entire evidence available on record, convicted the appellant and sentenced him, which is strictly in accordance with law and does not require any interference and his appeal is liable to be dismissed. 11. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record with utmost circumspection. 12. The first question which arises for consideration is, whether the victim is minor and less than 18 years of age. To prove the age of the victim, the prosecution relied the school register (exhibit P-9C), which is sought to be proved by incharge Headmistress of the school (PW- 5). She stated in her evidence that the police has seized the school register (exhibit P-9) vide seizure memo (exhibit P-8) and the attested true copy of school register is exhibit P-9C. As per the school register the date of birth of the victim is 05.01.2005. In cross- examination he admitted that, she is not the author of the school register and she could not state as to on what basis, her date of birth has been recorded. 13. The victim (PW-1) has stated that her date of birth is 05.01.2005 and in the year 2021, she studied in class-12th. In her cross-examination, her date of birth has not been challenged by the appellant. Her date of birth is corroborated with the entries made in the school register (exhibit P-9C). 9 14. PW-2, father of the victim has also stated that the date of birth of his daughter/victim is 05.01.2005. In cross-examination, he stated that the victim was admitted in the school, when she was 5 years of age. Though he admitted that at the time of admission, in the school, the birth certificate or Aadhaar card is required for date of birth of the children, but he voluntarily stated that earlier it was not necessary. The circulars and guidelines of the School Education Department is changing time to time. He has not got prepared the birth certificate of his daughter. He has got recorded her date of birth in the school as per his own knowledge. He also admitted that since he is also a teacher, he is regularly maintaining the school register. He further admitted that after obtaining transfer certificate from earlier school, he get the victim admitted in subsequent school. This witness has cross-examined at length on the point of date of birth of the victim, but he firmly answered and stuck in saying that the victim is minor and her date of birth is 05.01.2005. Despite detailed cross- examination, nothing substantive could be extracted to hold that the date of birth of the victim stated by her father is not correct and she is not minor. Although he admitted that in the school register (exhibit P- 9C), the school register of class-2nd (exhibit D-2) and in the ration card (exhibit D-4) the date of birth of the victim is different, however in the document (exhibit D-2C) only the date and month is different, but the year of her birth is the same i.e. 2005. Further, in the second page of the exhibit D-4 bears the age of the victim as 14 years, whereas in the computerized print out, which is the first page of exhibit D-4, the age of the victim is shown as 19 years. The date of 10 birth of the victim as stated by herself (PW-1) is also supported the statement of PW-2 and the school record (exhibit P-9C). 15. The learned trial Court after having examined the entire evidence with respect to age and date of birth of the victim filed by the prosecution as well as the defence observed that under Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2015 the school record is the admissible document and the census record and ration card (exhibit D-1C and D-4C) cannot be considered to determine the age of the victim and from the documents (exhibit P-9C and D-2), the year of birth of the victim is the same i.e. 2005 and hold that she was less than 18 years of age, in which we do not find any perversity or illegality. 16. So far as the offence of rape, threatening given to the victim, getting her obscene photos viral, sexually harassed the victim by electronic mode by uploading her obscene photos in social media, causing miscarriage without the consent of the victim, we again examined the evidence available on record. 17. PW-1 is the victim. She stated in her evidence that in the year 2021, when she was studying at class 12th, she introduced with the appellant in the month of September-October, 2021. They started chatting through mobile phones and the appellant often sent her messages. In the month of November, 2021, when she was coming back to her house from the school, on the way the appellant met her and dragged towards shrubs inside the road despite her protest and made forceful sexual intercourse with her and also taken her 11 obscene photos without her knowledge. When she started crying due to the rape upon her, the appellant showed her obscene photos in his mobile phone and he threatened her that if she disclosed the incident to anyone, he would get the photos viral in social media. The appellant committed rape upon her despite her protest and objection. On the threatening that he will get her obscene photos viral in social media, he committed repeated forceful sexual intercourse with her till April 2022 and also snapped various nude photos. After her examination of class 12th, he called her by making mobile call and when she refused to meet him, he again threatened her about the same and thus he continued with forceful sexual intercourse with her. In the month of April-May her periods were stopped and she conceived pregnancy. When she disclosed her pregnancy to the appellant, he administered pills forcefully by which she got aborted. After 15 days of her abortion, the appellant started threatening and called her. When she refused to meet him, he sent her nude photos in her whatsapp and when she asked not to do this, he uploaded her obscene photos in his instagram story and whatsapp status and started showing it to the persons of the vicinity and village. He also shown her obscene photos to her cousin brothers and sent it in the whatsapp of her father and in the month of June 2022, he threatened her with dire consequences and then she disclosed the incident to her parents. She lodged the report (exhibit P-1) and then FIR (exhibit P-2) was registered. Her mobile phone was also seized vide seizure memo (exhibit P-5) and from its screenshot, her two obscene photographs were print out, which are article A-1 and A-2. 12 ******* In cross-examination, she disclosed the mobile No. xxxxxx3613 of the appellant, through which he sent the messages to her and get her nude photos viral. The appellant used to chat with her through whatsapp chatting. In the month of April-May 2022, she uninstalled the whatsapp from her mobile phone, therefore, the previous chatting might not be available in her mobile phone and she again installed whatsapp in the month of July 2022. The mobile which she was using was not having voice recording facility. The written complaint (exhibit P-1) has been prepared by herself. She admitted that she has not disclosed about her pregnancy and abortion and also the obscene photos in her written complaint. She admitted that the police has seized her two obscene photographs, in which the appellant is with her in objectionable condition. She admitted that at the time when the appellant committed rape upon her, he snapped the obscene photographs. She does not know as to whether the appellant had snapped her obscene photographs whenever he made physical relation with her. She knew about only those photographs, which the appellant sent her in mobile phone. She further admitted that in the mobile phone of the appellant, through which he was chatting with her, his photograph was there in profile picture. Sometimes, it was removed. She further stated that she has not taken any medical assistance after conceiving pregnancy and she has no medical document of her pregnancy or treatment. She denied that the appellant has never committed rape upon her and she has never conceived pregnancy. The photographs (article A-1 and A-2) were print out from the screenshot of her mobile phone. She denied that her father wanted to perform her marriage 13 with the appellant and when the appellant refused, she lodged false report against him. ******* From the evidence of the victim, the defence could not be able to extract any material, which makes her evidence doubtful. She being the victim of the offence, categorically stated that about the incident of rape, uploading her obscene photographs in social media and threatening given by the appellant, which she suffered. Importantly, the defence itself has given a positive suggestion in para 23 of her evidence that the photographs were snapped at the time when the appellant committing rape upon her. Further, it is not the case of the appellant that he did not know the victim or he has no physical relation with her. The defence tried to establish that the victim was the consenting party in making physical relation with him, but the manner in which she was sexually exploited by the appellant cannot be considered to be of consensual physical relation without any fear or coercion. The allegation leveled by the victim that the appellant threatened her that he will get he obscene photos viral and committed sexual intercourse with her, is supported by her obscene photographs (article A-1 and A-2), which have been extracted from her mobile phone sent by the appellant. Had the victim been made consensual physical relation, she would not have lodge any report against the appellant and stated about consensual physical relation, but she denied the same. 18. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Balusudan Khalde v. State of Maharashtra, 2023 SCC Online, 355, has held that:- 14 “32. We noticed that in the cross-examination of the original first informant, PW-1 Asgar Shaikh (Exh.7), few suggestions were put to him by the defence counsel. We quote the relevant part of the cross-examination of the first informant: “The attack on us was sudden. The first blow was hit on my head. I was assaulted severely on the head. Due to assault, I suffered a bleeding injury. It is not true that I felt giddy due to assault. Yes I however suffered pain. At that time, I did not feel that I should save my life. I did not feel that I should run away or I should try to hide myself. I went towards the side of Lohiya Nagar Police Chowkey. I did feel that I was being assaulted without any reason. Abbas was screaming while he was being assaulted. …” 33. We are of the view from the aforesaid that the suggestions put by the defence counsel in the cross-examination of the eyewitnesses establishes the presence of PW-1 Asgar Shaikh at the scene of offence and the factum of assault could also be said to have been admitted. The reply to the suggestions answers the submission canvassed by the learned counsel for the appellants that PW-1 Asgar Shaikh should not be believed or relied upon as there is nothing on record to indicate that he was an injured eyewitness. The defence could be said to have admitted the presence of PW-1 Asgar Shaikh. When the aforesaid part of the cross-examination of PW-1 Asgar Shaikh was brought to the notice of the defence counsel, he submitted that a 15 suggestion put by defence counsel to a witness in his cross-examination has no evidentiary value and even if the same is incriminating in any manner would not bind the accused as the defence counsel has no implied authority to admit the guilt of the facts incriminating the accused. 34. According to the learned counsel such suggestions could be a part of the defence strategy to impeach the credibility of the witness. The proof of guilt required of the prosecution does not depend on the satisfaction made to a witness. 35. In Tarun Bora alias Alok Hazarika v. State of Assam reported in 2002 Cri. LJ 4076, a three Judge Bench of this Court was dealing with an appeal against the order passed by the Designated Court, Guwahati, in TADA Sessions case wherein the appellant was convicted under Section 365 of the IPC read with Section 3(1) and 3(5) of the Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987. 36. In Tarun Bora case, this Court, while considering the evidence on record took note of a suggestion which was put to one of the witnesses and considering the reply given by the witness to the suggestion put by the accused, arrived at the conclusion that the presence of the accused was admitted. We quote with profit the following observations made by this Court in paragraphs 15, 16 and 17 resply as under: “15. The witness further stated that during the assault, the assailant accused him of giving information to the army about the 16 United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA). He further stated that on the third night he was carried away blind-folded on a bicycle to a different place and when his eyes were unfolded, he could see his younger brother- Kumud Kakati (P.W.-2) and his wife Smt. Prema Kakati (P.W.-3). The place was Duliapather, which is about 6-7 kms. away from his village Sakrahi. The witness identified the appellant-Tarun Bora and stated that it is he who took him in an ambassador car from the residence of Nandeswar Bora on the date of the incident. 16. In cross-examination the witness stated as under: "Accused Tarun Bora did not blind my eyes nor he assaulted me." 17. This part of cross-examination is suggestive of the presence of accused Tarun Bora in the whole episode. This will clearly suggest the presence of the accused-Tarun Bora as admitted. The only denial is the accused did not participate in blind-folding the eyes of the witness nor assaulted him.” 37. In Rakesh Kumar alias Babli v. State of Haryana reported in (1987) 2 SCC 34, this Court was dealing with an appeal against the judgment of the High Court affirming the order of the Sessions Judge whereby the appellant and three other persons were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC. While 17 reappreciating the evidence on record, this Court noticed that in the cross-examination of the PW-4, Sube Singh, a suggestion was made with regard to the colour of the shirt worn by one of the accused persons at the time of the incident. This Court taking into consideration the nature of the suggestion put by the defence and the reply arrived at the conclusion that the presence of the accused namely Dharam Vir was established on the spot at the time of occurrence. We quote the following observations made by this Court in paragraphs 8 and 9 respectively, as under: “8. PW 3, Bhagat Singh, stated in his examination-in-chief that he had identified the accused at the time of occurrence. But curiously enough, he was not cross- examined as to how and in what manner he could identify the accused, as pointed out by the learned Sessions Judge. No suggestion was also given to him that the place was dark and that it was not possible to identify the assailants of the deceased. 9. In his cross-examination, PW 4, Sube Singh, stated that the accused Dharam Vir, was wearing a shirt of white colour. It was suggested to him on behalf of the accused that Dharam Vir was wearing a shirt of cream colour. In answer to that suggestion, PW-4 said: “It is not correct that Dharam Vir accused was wearing a shirt of cream colour and not a white colour at that time.” The learned Sessions Judge has rightly observed that the above suggestion at least proves the presence of accused 18 Dharam Vir, on the spot at the time of occurrence.” 38. Thus, from the above it is evident that the suggestion made by the defence counsel to a witness in the cross-examination if found to be incriminating in nature in any manner would definitely bind the accused and the accused cannot get away on the plea that his counsel had no implied authority to make suggestions in the nature of admissions against his client. 39. Any concession or admission of a fact by a defence counsel would definitely be binding on his client, except the concession on the point of law. As a legal proposition we cannot agree with the submission canvassed on behalf of the appellants that an answer by a witness to a suggestion made by the defence counsel in the cross-examination does not deserve any value or utility if it incriminates the accused in any manner.” 19. In the case of ‘State of Himanchal Pradesh v. Sanjay Kumar’ 2017 (2) SCC 51, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that, the evidence of the victim can be the sole basis for conviction unless there are cogent reason for the court to be hesitant in believing the evidence of the victim or to seek corroboration. It has been held that:- “30. By no means, it is suggested that whenever such charge of rape is made, where the victim is a child, it has to be treated as a gospel truth and the accused person has to be convicted. We have already discussed above the manner in which the testimony of the prosecutrix is to be examined 19 and analysed in order to find out the truth therein and to ensure that deposition of the victim is trustworthy. At the same time, after taking all due precautions which are necessary, when it is found that the prosecution version is worth believing, the case is to be dealt with all sensitivity that is needed in such cases. In such a situation one has to take stock of the realities of life as well. Various studies show that in more than 80% cases of such abuses, perpetrators have acquaintance with the victims who are not strangers. The danger is more within than outside. Most of the time, acquaintance rapes, when the culprit is a family member, are not even reported for various reasons, not difficult to fathom. The strongest among those is the fear of attracting social stigma. Another deterring factor which many times prevents such victims or their families to lodge a complaint is that they find whole process of criminal justice system extremely intimidating coupled with absence of victim protection mechanism. Therefore, time is ripe to bring about significant reforms in the criminal justice system as well. Equally, there is also a dire need to have a survivor-centric approach towards victims of sexual violence, particularly, the children, keeping in view the traumatic long-lasting effects on such victims. 31. After thorough analysis of all relevant and attendant factors, we are of the opinion that none of the grounds, on which the High Court has cleared the respondent, has any merit. By now it is well settled that the testimony of a victim in cases of sexual offences is vital and unless there are compelling reasons which necessitate looking 20 for corroboration of a statement, the courts should find no difficulty to act on the testimony of the victim of a sexual assault alone to convict the accused. No doubt, her testimony has to inspire confidence. Seeking corroboration to a statement before relying upon the same as a rule, in such cases, would literally amount to adding insult to injury. The deposition of the prosecutrix has, thus, to be taken as a whole. Needless to reiterate that the victim of rape is not an accomplice and her evidence can be acted upon without corroboration. She stands at a higher pedestal than an injured witness does. If the court finds it difficult to accept her version, it may seek corroboration from some evidence which lends assurance to her version. To insist on corroboration, except in the rarest of rare cases, is to equate one who is a victim of the lust of another with an accomplice to a crime and thereby insult womanhood. It would be adding insult to injury to tell a woman that her claim of rape will not be believed unless it is corroborated in material particulars, as in the case of an accomplice to a crime. Why should the evidence of the girl or the woman who complains of rape or sexual molestation be viewed with the aid of spectacles fitted with lenses tinged with doubt, disbelief or suspicion? The plea about lack of corroboration has no substance (See Bhupinder Sharma v. State of H.P.). Notwithstanding this legal position, in the instant case, we even find enough corroborative material as well, which is discussed hereinabove.” 21 20. In the case of ‘Appabhai v. State of Gujarat’ 1988 Supp. SCC 241, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that:- “13. On the second contention, the learned counsel highlighted many of the contradictions in the evidence of Devji (PW 4) as against his previous statement, one recorded by the Executive Magistrate (Ex. 66) and another by the police during the investigation. We have, however, also examined the relevant evidence. It is true that there are many contradictions in the evidence of Devji. He has not attributed overt acts to individual accused in his statement before the police whereas he has attributed such overt acts in his evidence before the court. But that is no ground to reject his entire testimony. It must not be forgotten that he was a victim of the assault. Fortunately he has survived. He must, therefore, be considered as the best eyewitness. The court while appreciating the evidence must not attach undue importance to minor discrepancies. The discrepancies which do not shake the basic version of the prosecution case may be discarded. The discrepancies which are due to normal errors of perception or observation should not be given importance. The errors due to lapse of memory may be given due allowance. The court by calling into aid its vast experience of men and matters in different cases must evaluate the entire material on record by excluding the exaggerated version given by any witness. When a doubt arises in respect of certain facts alleged by such witness, the proper course is to ignore that fact only unless it goes into the root of the matter so as to demolish the entire prosecution 22 story. The witnesses nowadays go on adding embellishments to their version perhaps for the fear of their testimony being rejected by the court. The courts, however, should not disbelieve the evidence of such witnesses altogether if they are otherwise trustworthy. Jaganmohan Reddy, J., speaking for this Court in Sohrab v. State of Madhya Pradesh^5 observed: [SCC p. 756, SCC (Cri) p. 824, para 8] "This Court has held that falsus in uno falsus in omnibus is not a sound rule for the reason that hardly one comes across a witness whose evidence does not contain a grain of untruth or at any rate exaggeration, embroideries or embellishments. In most cases, the witnesses when asked about details venture to give some answer, not necessarily true or relevant for fear that their evidence may not be accepted in respect of the main incident which they have witnessed but that is not to say that their evidence as to the salient features of the case after cautious scrutiny cannot be considered." 21. From the evidence of the victim, it clearly established that, she was subjected to rape by the appellant, her obscene photographs were snapped, threatened her and ultimately her obscene photos were circulated in the social medial and also sent it to the whatsapp of her father. She duly proved the entire sequence of event, which she suffers by the appellant and she can be put to the definition of sterling witness. 23 22. In the case of ‘Dola @ Dolagobinda Pradhan and another v. State of Odisha’ 2018 (18) SCC 695, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that:- “6. It is well-settled law that if the version of the prosecutrix is believed, basic truth in her evidence is ascertainable and if it is found to be credible and consistent, the same would form the basis of conviction. Corroboration is not a sine qua non for a conviction in a rape case. The evidence of a victim of sexual assault stands on a par with the evidence of an injured witness and is entitled to great weight, absence of corroboration notwithstanding. If the evidence of the victim does not suffer from any basic infirmity and the "probabilities factor" does not render it unworthy of credence, as a general rule, there is no reason to insist on corroboration, except from medical evidence, where, having regard to the circumstances of the case, medical evidence can be expected to be forthcoming. When a grown up and married woman gives evidence on oath in court that she was raped, it is not the proper judicial approach to disbelieve her outright. 7. In this regard it would be useful to quote certain observations of this Court in Bharwada Bhoginbhai Hirjibhai v. State of Gujarat 2 wherein it is observed that: "10. By and large these factors are not relevant to India, and the Indian conditions. Without the fear of making too wide a statement, or of overstating the case, it can be said that rarely will a girl or a woman in India make false allegations of sexual 24 assault on account of any such factor as has been just enlisted. The statement is generally true in the context of the urban as al so rural society. It is also by and large true in the context of the sophisticated, not so sophisticated, and unsophisticated society. Only very rarely can one conceivably come across an exception or two and that too possibly from amongst the urban elites. Because: (1) A girl or a woman in the tradition-bound non-permissive society of India would be extremely reluctant even to admit that any incident which is likely to reflect on her chastity had ever occurred. (2) She would be conscious of the danger of being ostracised by the society or being looked down by the society including by her own family members, relatives, friends and neighbours. (3) She would have to brave the whole world. (4) She would face the risk of losing the love and respect of her own husband and near relatives, and of her matrimonial home and happiness being shattered. (5) If she is unmarried, she would apprehend that it would be difficult to secure an alliance with a suitable match from a respectable or an acceptable family. (6) It would almost inevitably and almost invariably result in mental torture and suffering to herself. (7) The fear of being taunted by others will always haunt her. (8) She would feel extremely embarrassed in relating the incident to others being overpowered by a feeling of shame on account of the 25 upbringing in a tradition-bound society where by and large sex is taboo. (9) The natural inclination would be to avoid giving nublicity to the incident lest the family name and family honour is brought into controversy parents of an unmarried girl as also the husband and members of the husband's family of a married woman, would also more often than not, want to avoid publicity on account of the The fear of social stigma on the family name and family honour. (77) The fear of the victim herself being considered to be promiscuous or in some way responsible for the incident regardless of her innocence. (12) The reluctance to face interrogation by the investigating agency, to face the court, to face the cross-examination by counsel for the culprit, and the risk of being disbelieved, acts as a deterrent. 11. In view of these factors the victims and their relatives are not too keen to bring the culprit to books. And when in the face of these factors the crime is brought to light there is a built-in assurance that the charge is genuine rather than fabricated. On principle, the evidence of a victim of sexual assault stands on a par with evidence of an injured witness. Just as a witness who has sustained an injury (which is not shown or believed to be self-inflicted) is the best witness in the sense that he is least likely to exculpate the real offender, the evidence of a victim of a sex offence is entitled to great weight, absence of corroboration 26 notwithstanding. And while corroboration in the form of eyewitness account of an independent witness may often be forthcoming in physical assault cases, such evidence cannot be expected in sex offences, having regard to the very nature of the offence. It would therefore be adding insult to injury to insist on corroboration drawing inspiration from the rules devised by the courts in the western world (obeisance to which has perhaps become a habit presumably on account of the colonial hangover). We are therefore of the opinion that if the evidence of the victim does not suffer from any basic infirmity, and the "probabilities factor" does not render it unworthy of credence, as a general rule, there is no reason to insist on corroboration except from the medical evidence, where, having regard to the circumstances of the case, medical evidence can be expected to be forthcoming, subject to the following qualification: Corroboration may be insisted upon when a woman having attained majority is found in a compromising position and there is a likelihood of her having levelled such an accusation on account of the instinct of self-preservation. Or when the "probabilities factor" is found to be out of tune." (emphasis supplied) 23. PW-2 is the father of the victim. He stated in his evidence that on 24.07.2022, the victim disclosed about the incident and the manner in which she was subjected to rape by the appellant. He described 27 the details which the victim informed him. He also stated that victim also disclosed him about her obscene photos snapped by the appellant and threatened her by him and continued his sexual assault up till April 2022. She also disclosed that in April-May 2022, she conceived pregnancy and when her pregnancy was informed to the appellant, he administered pills, by which she got aborted. He again started sexually exploiting her and when his daughter refused for physical relation, he uploaded her obscene photos in instagram ID and social media. The appellant also sent the obscene photos of the victim in his mobile phone and then, he took the victim to the police station and lodged the report. The police has seized the mobile phone of the appellant through the seizure memo (exhibit P-7) and taken the print out of photographs from screenshots of the mobile phone of the victim. ******* In cross-examination, he admitted that he had faced a criminal case for the offence under Section 354 of the IPC. The incident has been disclosed by the victim to him. He did not know as to whether the appellant has sent the obscene photos of the victim to any other persons except his and his daughter’s mobile phone. He voluntarily stated that, the appellant showed the obscene photos from his mobile phone to various persons of the vicinity. He has taken the print out of two photographs, which the appellant sent him in his mobile phone. The photographs which has been annexed in the case, was shown by the victim to him in her mobile phone and at that time, his wife was also present there. He could not remember the mobile number of the appellant through which he sent the 28 photographs to him, but he could tell the same after seeing the mobile phone. He admitted that the instagram ID of the victim is ‘abcxx71’ and presently it is disabled. He denied that in the said ID, the victim uploaded a message that he pressurized her for giving false evidence in the court against the appellant. He also denied the suggestion that he wanted the marriage of the victim with the appellant and when the appellant denied the same, she lodged the report against him. *******On 14.07.2025, he was recross-examined by the defence, which relates to the age and date of birth of the victim, which has already been considered in the earlier part of this judgment while considering the age and date of birth of the victim. From the evidence of this witness, the circulation of obscene photos of the victim in his mobile phone could not be rebutted by the defence. He also proved the manner in which the victim was exploited by the appellant by putting her in fear of uploading her obscene photos in social media, which the appellant ultimately did. 24. PW-7 is the investigating officer. He stated in his evidence that, when he received case diary of the case, he prepared the spot map (exhibit P-3), the school register has been seized vide seizure memo (exhibit P-8), vaginal slide of the victim was seized vide seizure memo (exhibit P-10) and the underwear of the appellant was also seized vide seizure memo (exhibit P-11). The mobile phone of the appellant has been seized vide seizure memo (exhibit P-7) and the mobile phone of the victim has been seized vide seizure memo (exhibit P-5). He referred the victim for her medical examination to CHC, 29 Ramanujganj and recorded the statement of the witnesses. The statement of the victim was also recorded under Section 164 of CRPC by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ramanujganj and the vaginal slide of the victim and underwear of the appellant were sent to FSL Ambikapur for its chemical examination and the FSL report is exhibit P-13 and after completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed against the appellant. He being the procedural witness, proved the process of investigation, which he conducted. The seizure of mobile phone of the appellant as well as the victim having much more important in his evidence, which have been seized vide seizure memo (exhibit P-7 and P-5 respectively). From perusal of the seizure memo (exhibit P-7) it bears the mobile No. xxxxxx3418 and xxxxxx7292 from the appellant and the IMEI numbers have also been mentioned. From perusal of the seizure memo (exhibit P-5), it bears the mobile No. xxxxxx5746 of the victim and its IMEI number is also mentioned. The allegation in the present case is that the appellant forwarded the obscene photos of the victim in his aforesaid mobile number to the mobile phone of the victim, which has been seized vide seizure memo (exhibit P-5). 25. PW-12 Sanjeev Nema is a Nodal Officer of Reliance Jio Info Limited, Raipur. He stated in his evidence that he issued the CAF details of mobile No. xxxxxx3613, which was in the name of xxx (PW-13) temporary resident of Motichar, Gujarat and permanently resident of village Vijay Nagar, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.). he proved the documents (exhibit P-18, P-19 and P-20). In cross- 30 examination, he admitted that the SIM card of said mobile number was purchased from Gujarat and its KYC was electronically filled up. 26. PW-13 is the person in whose name the said mobile No. xxxxxx3613 is registered. He is the brother-in-law of the appellant. When the leading question was being asked from him, he admitted that when he had gone to Gujarat for work, he purchased a SIM card of mobile No. xxxxxx3613. Though he denied that the said mobile number was being used by his brother-in-law i.e. the appellant, but he could not explain as to its existence and use. When the question was being asked by the Court, he replied that in the year 2015, the said mobile of mobile No. xxxxxx3613 was missing, but he has not lodged any report of the same. From the evidence of this witness, it comes that the appellant is his brother-in-law, the SIM card of mobile No. xxxxxx3613 has been seized from the appellant and this witness has not explained, what he did when the said mobile was allegedly missing from Gujarat in the year 2015. seizure of mobile No. xxxxxx3613 from the brother-in-law of this witness itself sufficient to prove that the said mobile number was in possession of the appellant, which was registered in the name of his brother-in-law (PW-13). 27. PW-14 is the Inspector Cyber Forensic Lab, Raipur. She stated in her evidence that, she received two seized mobile phones along with the memo of Superintendent of Police, Balrampur. The query was raised from the Cyber cell, as to whether from whatsapp account No. xxxxxx3613, there is any transfer of obscene photos in the mobile No. xxxxxx5746, availability of obscene photos in the said mobile 31 phones and its comparison, whether the photographs available in both these mobile numbers are same or not. It was also queried for storage of data to various mobile numbers and IP address and MAC address of both the mobile numbers with respect to its obscene contents. During the evidence, she identified both the mobile phones (article A-3 and A-4) and stated that she examined the mobile phones through UFED software of 7.66 version and file system method. After its examination, she gave report that in the retrieved data of mobile No. xxxxxx3613, there is no evidence of sending the obscene photos in mobile No. xxxxxx5746, however, there was evidence of chatting and screenshots. From the retrieved data of exhibit-B, there is transfer of obscene photographs in both the mobile numbers i.e. xxxxxx5746 and xxxxxx3613. They obtained the relevant material from METADATA of the mobile phones, which was sent in PDF form. There was frequent whatsapp chat, video call and sharing of photos found from both the mobile numbers, which were saved in a pen- drive in the suspected folder, which are article-A-5 and A-6. 28. At this stage, the pen-drives were displayed before the court in presence of the counsel of the respective parties and a note has been put up in the deposition sheet of this witness. 29. This witness has proved her report (exhibit P-21) and certificate under Section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which is exhibit P-22. In cross-examination, she admitted that she has not given any report with respect to the ownership of the said mobile SIM card. There is hash value of the IMEI number of the said mobile phones. 32 30. From perusal of the report (exhibit P-21), it clearly revealed that there are evidence of transferring obscene photos between the aforesaid two mobile phone numbers i.e. xxxxxx5746 and xxxxxx3613, which has been proved by PW-14 and the same is the allegation against the appellant that he posted and forwarded the obscene photos of the victim from his mobile phone to her mobile phone. 31. The appellant has also been convicted for the offence under Section 509-B of the IPC and Section 67 of the IT Act. It is necessary here to take notice of these provisions for which the appellant has been convicted, which reads as under: “509-B. Sexual harassment by electronic mode.- Whoever, by means of telecommuni- cation device or by any other electronic mode including internet, makes creates, solicits or initiates the transmission of any comment, request, suggestion, proposal, image or other communication, which is obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy or indecent with intent to harass or cause or having knowledge that it would harass or cause annoyance or mental agony to a woman shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months but may extend to two years and shall also be liable to fine." “67. Punishment for publishing or transmitt- ing obscene material in electronic form. - Whoever publishes or transmits or causes to be published or transmitted in the electronic form, any material which is lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest or if its effect is such as to tend to 33 deprave and corrupt persons who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it, shall be punished on first conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and with fine which may extend to five lakh rupees and in the event of second or subsequent conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years and also with fine which may extend to ten lakh rupees.” 32. Upon an overall appreciation of the evidence of PW-13 and PW-14, this Court finds that the prosecution has successfully established the identity of the mobile phone used by the appellant as well as its involvement in transmitting the obscene photographs to the victim. Though PW-13 attempted to deny that mobile No. xxxxxx3613, admittedly registered in his name, was being used by the appellant, his evidence does not inspire confidence. He admitted that the SIM card had been obtained by him while he was in Gujarat, but could not furnish any satisfactory explanation as to how the said SIM card came into the possession of the appellant. His plea that the mobile phone had gone missing in the year 2015 is not supported by any complaint or report. On the contrary, the seizure of the SIM card/mobile bearing No. xxxxxx3613 from the possession of the appellant remains unrebutted. Thus, the evidence of PW-13, read along with the seizure memo and other prosecution evidence, clearly establishes that the said mobile number was in the possession and use of the appellant at the relevant point of time. 34 33. The evidence of PW-14, the Cyber Forensic Expert, lends complete corroboration to the prosecution case. Her report (Exhibit P-21), duly supported by the certificate under Section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Exhibit P-22), establishes that the mobile phones bearing Nos. xxxxxx3613 and xxxxxx5746 contained metadata evidencing frequent whatsapp chats, video calls and exchange of photographs. More importantly, the forensic examination conclusively revealed transfer of obscene photographs between the aforesaid mobile numbers. The relevant electronic records extracted through UFED software and preserved in the pen-drives (Articles A-5 and A-6) substantiate the transmission of such obscene material through electronic means. Nothing substantial has been elicited in the cross-examination of PW-14 to discredit either the methodology adopted by her or the authenticity of the electronic evidence produced by her. 34. The evidence of PW-13 identifying the appellant as the person in possession of mobile No. xxxxxx3613, coupled with the unimpeached forensic evidence of PW-14 proving transmission of obscene photographs from the said mobile phone to the victim's mobile phone, forms a complete and consistent chain of circumstances establishing the appellant's involvement in the commission of the offence. The electronic evidence, duly proved in accordance with law, clearly demonstrates that the appellant used electronic communication for transmitting obscene photographs to the victim. Such acts squarely attract the ingredients of Section 67 of the IT Act, as the appellant knowingly transmitted obscene material in 35 electronic form. Simultaneously, the act of forwarding obscene photographs of the victim through electronic means amounts to an act intended to insult her modesty and violate her dignity and privacy, thereby constituting the offence punishable under Section 509-B of the IPC. Accordingly, this Court finds that the prosecution has proved these charges against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. 35. So far as the charge under Section 313 of the IPC is concerned, the victim (PW-1) has categorically deposed that after she conceived pregnancy in the month of April-May, 2022 as a consequence of the repeated sexual intercourse committed by the appellant, she informed him about the pregnancy, whereupon the appellant forcibly administered pills to her, resulting in termination of the pregnancy. This part of her testimony has been substantially corroborated by PW-2, the father of the victim, before whom the victim disclosed the entire incident immediately. Nothing material has been elicited in the cross-examination of either witness to discredit their version regarding the forcible administration of pills by the appellant. Merely because no medical record of pregnancy or abortion has been produced, the otherwise cogent and trustworthy testimony of the victim cannot be discarded, particularly when she has consistently stated that the miscarriage was caused by the appellant against her will. It is a settled principle of criminal jurisprudence that the credible and reliable testimony of the victim, if found trustworthy, is sufficient to found a conviction even in the absence of independent medical corroboration. The evidence on record, therefore, establishes beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant voluntarily caused the 36 miscarriage of the victim without her consent, thereby committing the offence punishable under Section 313 of the IPC and the learned trial Court has rightly held him guilty for the said offence. 36. So far as the charge under Section 506 Part-II of the IPC is concerned, the evidence of the victim (PW-1) clearly establishes that immediately after committing forcible sexual intercourse, the appellant showed her the obscene photographs secretly taken by him and threatened that if she disclosed the incident to anyone, he would make those photographs viral on social media. The victim has consistently deposed that on account of such threats, she remained under constant fear and the appellant continued to sexually exploit her repeatedly till April, 2022. Even thereafter, when she refused to meet him, the appellant reiterated the threats and ultimately carried them into effect by sending the obscene photographs to her whatsapp, uploading them on his instagram story and whatsapp status and circulating them amongst persons of the locality, including forwarding them to her father. The testimony of the victim on this aspect is natural, cogent and trustworthy and has remained unshaken in cross-examination. Rather, the defence itself suggested that the obscene photographs were taken at the time of the incident, thereby lending support to the prosecution case regarding the existence of such photographs. The subsequent circulation of the obscene photographs further corroborates that the threats extended by the appellant were real and intended to cause alarm to the victim, compelling her to submit to his unlawful demands. Such intimidation by threatening to outrage the dignity and reputation of the victim and 37 by repeatedly extending threats of dire consequences squarely falls within the ambit of criminal intimidation punishable under Section 506 Part-II of the IPC. Accordingly, the learned trial Court has justified in convicting the appellant for the offence under Section 506 Part-II of the IPC and there is no infirmity or illegality in the same. 37. Having considered the entire evidence on record, this Court finds that the prosecution has succeeded in establishing the charge under Section 376(2)(n) of the IPC as well as Section 6 of the POCSO 2012 beyond reasonable doubt. The victim (PW-1) has given a consistent, natural and trustworthy account that the appellant initially committed forcible sexual intercourse with her after dragging her to a secluded place despite her resistance and, during the said act, secretly took her obscene photographs. Thereafter, by repeatedly threatening to make those photographs viral on social media, he compelled her to submit to repeated acts of sexual intercourse till April, 2022. Her testimony has remained unshaken in the cross- examination and no material contradiction or improvement has been brought on record to discredit her version. Rather, the defence, by suggesting that the photographs were taken during the physical relationship, has admitted the existence of the obscene photographs. The said photographs (Articles A-1 and A-2), recovered from the victim's mobile phone, coupled with the electronic evidence proving their transmission and circulation, lend substantial assurance to the version of the victim. The testimony of PW-2, to whom the victim disclosed the entire occurrence immediately after the appellant acted upon his threats by circulating her obscene photographs, further 38 corroborates the prosecution case. The plea of consensual relationship raised by the defence is liable to be rejected, as the evidence unmistakably demonstrates that the victim continued to submit to the appellant only because of the persistent threats of publication of her obscene photographs, which completely negated the element of free and voluntary consent. Besides, this Court has already held that the victim was below eighteen years of age on the date of the occurrence and was, therefore, a child within the meaning of the POCSO Act. Consequently, her consent, if any, is of no legal consequence. The repeated commission of penetrative sexual assault upon the victim by the appellant, who kept her under continuous fear and intimidation, clearly constitutes the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of the IPC and also amounts to aggravated penetrative sexual assault punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act. 38. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘State of Punjab v. Gurmeet Singh’ 1996 (2) SCC 384 has observed that, the testimony of the victim must be appreciated in the background of the entire case and the trial court must be sensitive while dealing with the cases involving sexual molestation and has held that: “21. Of late, crime against women in general and rape in particular is on the increase. It is an irony that while we are celebrating woman's rights in all spheres, we show little or no concern for her honour. It is a sad reflection on the attitude of indifference of the society towards the violation of human dignity of the victims of sex crimes. We must remember that a rapist not only violates the 39 victim's privacy and personal integrity, but inevitably causes serious psychological as well as physical harm in the process. Rape is not merely a physical assault — it is often destructive of the whole personality of the victim. A murderer destroys the physical body of his victim, a rapist degrades the very soul of the helpless female. The courts, therefore, shoulder a great responsibility while trying an accused on charges of rape. They must deal with such cases with utmost sensitivity. The courts should examine the broader probabilities of a case and not get swayed by minor contradictions or insignificant discrepancies in the statement of the prosecutrix, which are not of a fatal nature, to throw out an otherwise reliable prosecution case. If evidence of the prosecutrix inspires confidence, it must be relied upon without seeking corroboration of her statement in material particulars. If for some reason the court finds it difficult to place implicit reliance on her testimony, it may look for evidence which may lend *assurance* to her testimony, short of corroboration required in the case of an accomplice. The testimony of the prosecutrix must be appreciated in the background of the entire case and the trial court must be alive to its responsibility and be sensitive while dealing with cases involving sexual molestations.” 39. In the case of ‘Prahlad and another v. State of Haryana’ 2015 (8) SCC 688, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that: “17. It has to be borne in mind that an offence of rape is basically an assault on the human rights of a victim. It is an attack on her individuality. It 40 creates an incurable dent in her right and free will and personal sovereignty over the physical frame. Everyone in any civilised society has to show respect for the other individual and no individual has any right to invade on physical frame of another in any manner. It is not only an offence but such an act creates a scar in the marrows of the mind of the victim. Anyone who indulges in a crime of such nature not only does he violate the penal provision of IPC but also the right of equality, right of individual identity and in the ultimate eventuality an important aspect of rule of law which is a constitutional commitment. The Constitution of India, an organic document, confers rights. It does not condescend or confer any allowance or grant. It recognises rights and the rights are strongly entrenched in the constitutional framework, its ethos and philosophy, subject to certain limitations. Dignity of every citizen flows from the fundamental precepts of the equality clause engrafted under Article 14 and right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution, for they are the "fons juris" of our Constitution. The said rights are constitutionally secured. 18. Therefore, regard being had to the gravity of the offence, reduction of sentence indicating any imaginary special reason would be an anathema to the very concept of rule of law. The perpetrators of the crime must realise that when they indulge in such an offence, they really create a concavity in the dignity and bodily integrity of an individual which is recognised, assured and affirmed by the very essence of Article 21 of the Constitution.” 41 40. In view of the foregoing discussion, we are of the considered opinion that the prosecution has successfully established, beyond all reasonable doubt, that the appellant committed repeated penetrative sexual assault upon the minor victim, criminally intimidated her by threatening to circulate her obscene photographs, knowingly transmitted such obscene material through electronic means, and voluntarily caused the miscarriage of her pregnancy without her consent. The testimony of the victim is cogent, natural and wholly trustworthy, which stands duly corroborated by the evidence of PW-2, the documentary evidence, and the electronic evidence proved in accordance with law through the Cyber Forensic Expert. The minor omissions and discrepancies pointed out by the defence are insignificant in nature and do not affect the core of the prosecution case. The findings of conviction recorded by the learned trial Court under Sections 376(2)(n), 313, 506 Part-II and 509-B of the IPC, Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 67 of the IT Act are based on proper appreciation of the evidence on record and do not suffer from any perversity, illegality or infirmity warranting interference by this Court. 41. Accordingly, the appeal, being devoid of merit, deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. 42. The appellant is reported to be in jail since 28.07.2022. He shall serve the entire sentence as awarded by the learned trial Court. 43. Registry is directed to send a copy of this judgment to the concerned Superintendent of Jail where the appellant is undergoing his jail 42 sentence 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. 44. Let a copy of this judgment and the original records be transmitted to the trial Court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice ved