High Court Dismisses Appeal in POCSO Act Case -- Appellant Convicted for Sexual Assault on Minor Under IPC Section 376(2)(f)(i) and POCSO Act Sections 5(i), 5(m), 5(p) -- Life Imprisonment and Fine Upheld Based on Victim's Credible Testimony and Medical Evidence

Sub Category: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR

Admin

2026-02-28 11:30:34

Font size:

Case Note & Summary

The High Court dismissed criminal appeal challenging conviction for sexual assault on minor -- Appellant was convicted by trial court under Section 376(2)(f)(i) of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 5(i), 5(m), 5(p) punishable under Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 -- Victim was five years eleven months old at time of incident -- Prosecution proved victim's age through birth certificate -- Victim testified that appellant inserted finger in her vagina while she was playing at his house -- Medical evidence confirmed sexual assault -- Victim's demeanor during testimony showed fear and trauma -- Court found victim's testimony credible and consistent with medical evidence -- No grounds for interference with trial court judgment -- Conviction and sentence of life imprisonment with fine upheld

Headnote

The High Court dismissed criminal appeal challenging conviction under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) and Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) -- Appellant convicted for offences under Section 376(2)(f)(i) of IPC and Sections 5(i), 5(m), 5(p) punishable under Section 6 of POCSO Act -- Victim was five years eleven months old at time of incident -- Prosecution proved age through birth certificate -- Victim's testimony specifically attributed overt act to appellant -- Medical evidence corroborated sexual assault -- Victim's demeanor during testimony showed trauma -- Court found victim's testimony credible and consistent -- No interference warranted with trial court judgment -- Appeal dismissed -- Life imprisonment and fine upheld

Premium Content

The Headnote is only available to subscribed members.

Subscribe Now to access key legal points

Issue of Consideration: Whether prosecution proved that accused committed penetrative sexual assault on six-year-old victim under Section 5(i)(m)&(p) punishable by Section 6 of POCSO Act and Section 376(2)(f)(i) of IPC, Whether interference was called for in the impugned judgment

Premium Content

The Issue of Consideration is only available to subscribed members.

Subscribe Now to access critical case issues

Final Decision

Appeal dismissed -- Conviction and sentence upheld -- Appellant to undergo life imprisonment and pay fine of Rs.2,00,000 to victim

2026 LawText (BOM) (02) 144

Criminal Appeal No. 461 of 2020

2026-02-23

Anil L. Pansare J. , Raj D. Wakode J.

BHC-NAG:3294-DB

Mr. Anil Mardikar, Mr. S.A. Kanetkar, Mr. S.S. Doifode

Suresh S/o. Govindrao Muneshwar

The State of Maharashtra

Premium Content

The Indexes are only available to subscribed members.

Subscribe Now to access critical case indexes

Nature of Litigation: Criminal appeal challenging conviction for sexual offences against minor

Remedy Sought

Appellant seeking acquittal or reduction of sentence

Filing Reason

Appellant aggrieved by conviction and life imprisonment sentence

Previous Decisions

Trial court convicted appellant under Section 376(2)(f)(i) of IPC and Sections 5(i), 5(m), 5(p) punishable under Section 6 of POCSO Act and sentenced to life imprisonment with fine

Issues

Whether prosecution proved penetrative sexual assault on minor victim under relevant provisions Whether interference was warranted with trial court judgment

Submissions/Arguments

Prosecution relied on victim's testimony, medical evidence, and birth certificate Defense likely challenged credibility of evidence

Ratio Decidendi

Testimony of child victim, when found credible and consistent, can form sole basis for conviction -- Medical evidence corroborating victim's testimony strengthens prosecution case -- Victim's demeanor during testimony indicating trauma adds to credibility -- Age of victim proved through documentary evidence is crucial element -- No interference warranted when trial court judgment is based on proper appreciation of evidence

Judgment Excerpts

"Whether prosecution proves that on 11th October, 2015 at the house of the accused at Mouza Barbadi, accused inserted his finger in the vagina of the six-year old victim...and committed penetrative sexual assault" -- Para 09 "Bittu's father inserted his finger in my organ of urination...I had lot of pain" -- Para 12 "Witness has cringed at the sight of the accused. She also became afraid and stated 2 to 3 times that she does not want to go near him" -- Para 14

Procedural History

FIR registered on 11th October, 2015 -- Charge-sheet filed -- Trial conducted in Special (POCSO) Case No. 40 of 2016 -- Conviction on 23rd October, 2020 -- Appeal filed in High Court -- Reserved on 26th November, 2025 -- Pronounced on 23rd February, 2026