The Patna High Court has ruled that “external rubbing” does not amount to “penetrative sexual assault” under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and set aside a conviction that had been based on such an act. The case involved an appellant who had been convicted under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to twenty years’ rigorous imprisonment by the trial court. The conviction was based on allegations that the accused had forced a six‑year‑old child onto his lap, taken her into a room, closed the door, and attempted to insert his penis into her anus.
On appeal, a Division Bench of the Patna High Court, comprising Justices Rajeev Ranjan Prasad and Sourendra Pandey, reviewed both the medical evidence and the factual account provided by the prosecution. The Court noted that the pelvic examination revealed no injury to the vaginal or labial areas, and only redness and swelling were observed near the opening of the anus. The doctor conducting the examination confirmed that there was no evidence of penetration and further admitted that the swelling could have been caused by a fall.
Considering the absence of medical evidence corroborating penetration, the Court concluded that the essential requirement of “penetrative sexual assault” under the POCSO Act had not been met. The Court also highlighted discrepancies and inconsistencies in the statements of the victim and her parents, which cast doubt on the prosecution’s narrative.
The High Court clarified that “external rubbing,” without penetration, cannot constitute penetrative sexual assault. In the absence of medical or compelling corroborative evidence, a conviction cannot rely solely on the unverified testimony of a child witness. Based on these findings, the Court acquitted the appellant and ordered his immediate release, setting aside the trial court’s conviction and sentence.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.