2026:JHHC:10916-DB Cr. A (D.B.) No.1188 of 2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No.1188 of 2025 [Against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 25.02.2025 and 28.02.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Khunti in POCSO Case No.17 of 2022 arising out of Rania P.S. Case No.21 of 2022] ------ X .... .... …. Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Respondent ------ For the Appellant : Mr. Awnish Shankar, Advocate For the Resp. State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P. PRESENT HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA JUDGMENT ------ CAV On 12/03/2026 Pronounce On 16 /04 /2026 Per- Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J. 1. Heard Mr. Awnish Shankar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Pankaj Kumar, learned P.P. 2. The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 25.02.2025 and 28.02.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Khunti in POCSO Case No.17 of 2022 arising out of Rania P.S. Case No.21 of 2022, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been held guilty for the offences under section 376-AB of Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of POCSO Act but has been sentenced alternatively for the offence under section 6 of POCSO Act directing him to undergo rigorous 2026:JHHC:10916-DB Cr. A (D.B.) No.1188 of 2025 2 imprisonment for 25 years along with a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- with default stipulation. Factual Matrix 3. The factual matrix giving rise to this appeal is that about one year prior to the occurrence, the appellant came to the informant and told that he does work of painting walls, so he engaged for painting work in the house of the informant and the informant also permitted the appellant to live in the house of the informant’s uncle, Dhaneshwar Mahto. It is alleged that the appellant started living along with his two female children and started the work of painting in the house. It is further alleged that on 04.06.2022 at about 4:00 am, while the informant was sleeping in his house, he heard the sound of weeping of a female child of the appellant, then he woke up and went there and saw that the appellant was committing wrong act with his elder daughter aged about 7 years after opening her clothes. Upon protest by the informant, the appellant started abusing him, meanwhile, the villagers assembled and the matter was informed on Child Help Line No.1098 about the occurrence. Thereafter, the police team also arrived at the place of occurrence and enquired from the informant as well as the victim girl and the appellant in presence of Panchyat Samiti, Teli Dahanga. 2026:JHHC:10916-DB Cr. A (D.B.) No.1188 of 2025 3 On the basis of written report of the informant, FIR was registered vide Rania P.S. Case No.21 of 2022 for the offences under section 376-AB of IPC and Sections 4/6 of POCSO Act on 04.06.2022 against the appellant. After conclusion of the investigation, the charge-sheet was submitted against the above named appellant to face the trial and has been held guilty and sentenced as stated above. Submission on behalf of the appellant 4. Learned counsel for the appellant assailing the impugned judgment has vehemently argued that the impugned judgment is absolutely illegal and based upon wrong interpretation of evidence adduced by the prosecution. The victim girl has been projected by the informant, who was employer of the appellant due to some ulterior motive and there is nothing in the evidence of the victim constituting any offence under section 6 of POCSO Act or under section 376AB of IPC. The informant as well as the victim girl have been examined during trial and have given vague statements as to actually what type of wrong act was committed by the appellant upon his own daughter. Learned counsel further submits that the medical report of the victim girl also does not find any visible injuries over any part of the victim girl and no sign of any wrongful act committed by the appellant. It is admitted position that the appellant was in the habit of taking/consuming liquor and under 2026:JHHC:10916-DB Cr. A (D.B.) No.1188 of 2025 4 intoxication, he used to scold his daughter, however, he was very happy and used to treat his both daughters cordially and taking care of them. It is further submitted that in the entire statement under section 313 of Cr.P.C., the question put to the appellant do not show any incriminating circumstance worth constituting any offences by the appellant even if the evidence of the victim girl and the informant may be admitted on its face value, no offence as charged against the appellant get attracted. Learned trial court has been swayed on his own emotions while recording the guilt of the appellant. Therefore, the impugned judgment and order suffers from serious error of law and liable to set aside. The appellant deserves acquittal from the charges leveled against him, allowing this appeal. Submission on behalf of the State 5. On the other hand, learned P.P. appearing for the State defending the impugned judgment has strenuously argued that the appellant is none else but the father of the victim girl, who was aged about 7 years at the time of occurrence and he has been found committing illicit act with his daughter at the odd time in the morning at about 4:00 am. The informant as well as the victim girl and other corroborating evidence prove the guilt of the appellant beyond all reasonable doubts. Learned trial court has committed no illegality in appreciating the evidence of witnesses and awarding sentence to the 2026:JHHC:10916-DB Cr. A (D.B.) No.1188 of 2025 5 appellant. Accordingly, this appeal has no merits and fit to be dismissed. 6. We have gone through the record of the case along with the impugned judgment and order in the light of contentions raised on behalf of both the side. 7. The only point for determination in this appeal is that “as to whether the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence of the appellant passed by learned trial court suffers from any error of law calling for any interference in this appeal?” Analysis, Reasons and Decision:- 8. Before adverting to adjudicate the aforesaid point, we have to take brief resume of oral as well as documentary evidence lead by the prosecution to substantiate the charges leveled against the appellant. 9. It appears that altogether 11 witnesses were examined by the prosecution. Out of them, except P.W.1, Shivam Nag and P.W.8, the victim girl, there is no eye-witness to the occurrence. P.W.2-Jaygovind Nag is the father of the informant, although, in his Examination-in-Chief, claims to have gone to the house of the accused after hearing sound of weeping of the girl child but in his cross-examination, he has specifically admitted that he did not go to the house of the appellant rather his son, Shivam Nag (P.W.1) narrated him about the 2026:JHHC:10916-DB Cr. A (D.B.) No.1188 of 2025 6 occurrence that the accused has committed wrong act with his elder daughter. P.W.3-Gyatri Devi is the mother of the informant and she has not seen the occurrence and is a hearsay witness from her son. P.W.4-Neli Dahenga is a Panchyat Secretary of village Jaipur. According to her evidence, she received information about the occurrence and has specifically admitted in his cross- examination that she has received information about the occurrence at about 10:00-11:00 am but she has not seen the accused while committing wrongful act with his daughter. P.W.5-Kanchan Nag has been declared hostile by the prosecution. Admittedly, he heard hulla in the village about the occurrence. P.W.6-Ramesh Mahto has also been declared hostile. He admits that he was out of village for work on the date of occurrence. P.W.7-Loknath Bhandari is a member of Child Line, Khunti. According to his evidence, on Help Line No.1098, a phone call was received and was informed that in village, Rania, a father is involved in physical exploitation of his own seven years daughter. At first, he gave written information to Rania Police Station about the same occurrence and then, he along with police went to the house of the victim girl and 2026:JHHC:10916-DB Cr. A (D.B.) No.1188 of 2025 7 thereafter the accused and his daughters were taken into custody by the police. This witness has stated nothing else in his cross- examination rather he admits that he reached at Rania Police Station about 5-6 pm on 04.06.2022, he does not know, who is Investigating Officer of this case and he was not interrogated by any of the Investigating Officers of this case. Further, this witness admits that no occurrence has taken place in his presence. P.W.9-Saniyo Kongadi is also a worker in LDC Office Child Line, Khunti. According to her evidence, a phone call was received on Help Line No.1098 that a father is indulged in physical relationship with his minor daughter at village, Rania. Thereafter, she along with Panchyat Secretary, Neli Dahenga asked the victim girl about the incident, then she stated that her father does wrong act with her. The victim girl was sent for medical examination at Sadar Hospital, Khunti and her wearing frock was also produced and production-cum-seizure list was prepared in her presence and she identified her signature, which is marked as Ext.2. Therefore, this witness is also a hearsay witness of the occurrence. P.W.10-Sandip Kumar is Investigating Officer of this Case. According to his evidence, on 04.06.2022, he was entrusted with the charge of investigation of Rania P.S. Case 2026:JHHC:10916-DB Cr. A (D.B.) No.1188 of 2025 8 No.21/2022 registered under section 376-AB of Indian Penal Code and Sections 4/6 of POCSO Act. He further states that at that day, ASI, Mithilesh Jamadar along with employees of Child Line, Khunti, namely Loknath Bhandari (P.W.7) and Saniyo Kongadi (P.W.9) came with the victim girl along with her younger sister, who were rescued, to police station and thereafter they were handed over to Sahyog Village, Khunti for custody. In course of investigation, this witness recorded the restatement of the informant, Shivam Nag and visited the place of occurrence, which is the house of Dhaneshwar Nag situated in village Jaipur. It is a single room house wherein the accused was residing along with his two minor daughters on rent. He arrested the accused on the same day and also recorded the statement of witnesses, Jaigovind Nag, Gayatri Devi, Neli Dahanga, Kanchan Nag, Ramesh Mahto etc. The accused confessed his guilt and his confessional statement (Ext.4) was also recorded. This witness also obtained medical examination report of the victim and the wearing clothes of the victim at the time of occurrence, which were produced and seized in this case and the seizure list was prepared. He also got the statement of the victim girl and the informant, Shivam Nag recorded under section 164 of Cr.P.C. and he also recorded the statement of workers of Child Line, Khunti, namely, Loknath Bhandari, Saniyro Kongadi and Jaikan 2026:JHHC:10916-DB Cr. A (D.B.) No.1188 of 2025 9 Kandula. He also obtained the medical report of the victim. This witness went to SPG, Primary School, Jaipur where the victim girl was studying in class-I and collected birth certificate about the date of birth showing 16.04.2014. The seized clothes of the victim girl were sent to FSL, Ranchi by the order of court. After conclusion of investigation, he found sufficient evidence and submitted charge-sheet against the appellant for the offences under section 376-AB and Sections 4/6 of POCSO Act. He proved the endorsement of the written report for statement Ext.1/1 and formal FIR scribed by Police Station Munsi, Jagdish Kumar Murmu and signed by the then Officer-in-Charge, Jitendra Kumar Yadav marked as Ext.2. He further proves the seizure list, which has been produced by Dr. Arti Purty bearing signature of witnesses, Loknath Bhandari and Soniyo Kongadi marked Ext.2/1. He further proved arrest memo of the accused as Ext.3 and his signature on application presented before the Special Court, POCSO Act for sending the seized materials to FSL, Ranchi for examination marked as Ext.5 and forwarding Letter Memo No.287/22 dated 20.06.2022 as Ext.6. In his cross-examination, no attention towards any contradictions appearing in the evidence of any prosecution witnesses has been drawn by the defence. It is simply 2026:JHHC:10916-DB Cr. A (D.B.) No.1188 of 2025 10 suggested that his investigation is defective and he has submitted charge-sheet without proper evidence. P.W.11-Ajay Kumar is Assistant Director of S.S.O and is presently on deputation Mobile Forensic Van, Sahebganj. According to his evidence on 25.08.2022, he was posted at D.F.S.L., Ranchi. He further stated that vide Memo No.287/22 dated 20.06.2022 dispatch of one parcel(S) through special messenger (S) S.I., Alit Sagar Kerketta was received in his office on 29.06.2022 in connection with Rania Case No.21/22 dated 04.06.2022 under section 376-AB and Section 4/6 of POCSO Act. The parcel consisted of one cloth packet duly sealed, which contained one panty and one frock marked A1 and A2 respectively. Ext.A1 is cream color printed panty, bore no any distinct stain and multicolor printed frock marked A2 also bore no any distinct stain. Result of Examination(S) reveals neither blood nor seamen could be detected on each of the clothes marked A1 and A2. The report is marked as Ext.P7/PW11. 10. On the other hand, no oral or documentary evidence has been adduced by the defence. The plea of defence is denial from occurrence and false implication. 11. The statement of accused recorded under section 313 of Cr.P.C. goes to show that there is compound question that as per evidence of P.Ws.1, 2, 3 and 4, the accused was seen while 2026:JHHC:10916-DB Cr. A (D.B.) No.1188 of 2025 11 doing wrong act with his daughter, which has been denied. The next question on the basis of evidence of the victim girl is that he was doing wrong act with his daughter, and she used to weep but he did not stop, has also been denied. 12. We have given anxious consideration to the overall evidence available on record, it appears that the sole eye-witness in this case is the informant, Shivam Nag and his statement under section 164 of Cr.P.c. was also recorded by the Magistrate, which shows that he was engaged in tuition of children and since the accused started living adjacent to his house in rented quarter of his uncle along with his two daughters, he used to hear the noise of weeping every day. Sometimes, upon the warning of this witness, the weeping sound stopped but it was quite annoying to this witness and his family. He also stated that on 04.06.2022 at about 4:00 am while he was sleeping, he heard noise of weeping of the girl child and with a view to teach a lesson to the accused, he went to his house and saw that the door was opened and younger daughter of the accused was weeping outside the room then he went inside and saw that the accused was committing rape upon his own elder daughter. He protested him then the accused started abusing. In his evidence during trial, the informant has been examined as P.W.1, Shivam Nag has simply stated that on 04.06.2022 in the night, he heard noise of weeping coming from 2026:JHHC:10916-DB Cr. A (D.B.) No.1188 of 2025 12 the house of accused and he along with other went there and saw that the accused was doing wrongful act putting off the clothes of his own minor daughter when they protested and forbade the accused then he started abusing them and thereafter he informed to Child Help Line and also lodged this case. In his cross-examination, he fairly admits that he had heard the noise of child coming from the house of accused several times prior to the occurrence and as a matter of fact, the children also used to cry due to hunger and illness. He also admits that the police has interrogated with him but simply his name and address and name of other family members was asked and nothing else. He was running English Spoken Classes in between 6-8 pm. He usually sees the accused wearing towel only. He denied the suggestion of the defence that since the accused was not vacating the rented house of the uncle of this witness and he was annoyed due to noise of the children, hence, he lodged this false case against the accused. 13. Now most sterling eye-witness is P.W.8, the victim girl herself. She has stated that her mother has been died and she resides with her father along with her younger sister. She has further stated that her father returned to home after consuming liquor then he used to do wrong act with her. Even, she was weeping 2026:JHHC:10916-DB Cr. A (D.B.) No.1188 of 2025 13 and feeling pain but her father continued to do wrongful act with her. In the court question, she also admits that her father used to cook food and wash her clothes and send her to school. 14. It is also quite obvious that the medical examination report of the victim was not brought on record examined by the doctor. The FSL report does not confirm the story of commission of rape with the victim and the motive behind lodging the case by the informant is itself reflected in his statement under section 164 of Cr.P.C. that he was desiring to teach a lesson to the accused because his daughter used to weep and crying, which was disturbing in the studying course of the informant. It is very peculiar that none of the witnesses has stated in clear terms as to what exact and allegedly wrongful act was committed by the appellant. The burden lies on the informant, who claims to be eye-witness to the occurrence but he has whispered nothing in his evidence by disclosing the actual act, which was being committed by the accused with his own daughter. Admittedly, the girl child, who happens to be the daughter of the accused, was aged about 7 years and dolly incapax, she cannot understand the nature and consequences of sexual assault even at the time of her examination under section 164 of Cr.P.C. or at the trial, the court itself also did not take pain to elicit the meaning of wrong act done by her father 2026:JHHC:10916-DB Cr. A (D.B.) No.1188 of 2025 14 to her or even to elicit what particular act was being done by her father even scolding and assaulting under intoxication is also wrongful act causing pain to child. Therefore, none availability of any cogent and reliable corroborative evidence and vagueness in the ocular testimony of P.W.1 and P.W.8, the constituents of offence under section 376-AB of IPC and sections 4/6 of POCSO Act have not been established by the prosecution at all. It appears that learned trial court has based the judgment on the basis of conjecture, assumption and presumption while interpreting the wrongful act committed by the appellant with his daughter. The court has not discharged its liability to get explained the true affairs of the act actually happened with the victim girl. Therefore, we find that prosecution story is motivated with retaliation by the informant and vagueness of his evidence creates reasonable doubts about the happening of sexual assault with the victim girl. Therefore, we are of the conclusion that learned trial court while appreciating the evidence of material witnesses, has committed serious error of law and also in absence of any corroborative evidence, has wrongly recorded the conclusion of guilt of the appellant. 15. In view of the above discussion and reasons, we find merits in this appeal. Accordingly, the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 25.02.2025 and 28.02.2025 2026:JHHC:10916-DB Cr. A (D.B.) No.1188 of 2025 15 passed by learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Khunti in POCSO Case No.17 of 2022 arising out of Rania P.S. Case No.21 of 2022 is, hereby, set aside and the appellant is acquitted from the charges leveled against him. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed. 16. The appellant is in jail custody, therefore, he is directed to be released forthwith, if not, wanted in any other case. 17. Pending I.A(s), if any, is also disposed of accordingly. 18. Let a copy of this judgment be sent to the court concerned through FAX/Email for information and needful. (Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.) (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) Jharkhand High Court, at Ranchi Date:16 /04 /2026 Pappu/- N.A.F.R. Uploaded on 17/04/2026