The Kerala High Court has dismissed a criminal appeal filed by a man convicted under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and the Indian Penal Code (IPC), upholding his 10-year prison sentence and ₹50,000 fine.
Justice A. Badharudeen delivered the judgment on September 1, 2026, after re-examining the evidence relied upon by the Special Court, Alappuzha.
The case arose from Crime No. 728/2015 registered at Ramankary Police Station, Alappuzha. According to the prosecution, the alleged incident took place on November 17, 2014, when the 17-year-old victim was at her residence. She stated that the appellant, Reji, allegedly took her to the courtyard, tied her hands to a nearby jackfruit tree and sexually assaulted her. She further alleged that similar assaults occurred on two subsequent occasions.
The victim later informed her father that she was being disturbed by the appellant. The judgment records that her father questioned Reji, following which a scuffle took place. She also informed her father's sister, Ponnamma, about the alleged incidents. Ponnamma later accompanied her to hospital, where the victim narrated the allegations to the examining doctor.
The defence questioned the delay in reporting the alleged 2014 incident. It pointed out that Crime No. 725/2015 concerning the assault on the victim's father was registered on December 24, 2015, while the FIR in the present case was registered on December 25, 2015. The defence argued that the sequence suggested false implication. It also relied on the fact that the scene mahazar did not mention a jackfruit tree and that the victim had admitted having a love relationship with the appellant.
The Special Court, after examining the prosecution evidence, convicted the appellant under Sections 376, 376(2)(n) and 376(2)(f) of the IPC and Section 4(1) read with Section 3(a) of the POCSO Act. It sentenced him to 10 years' simple imprisonment and imposed a ₹50,000 fine, with six months' additional simple imprisonment in default. Reji challenged the conviction and sentence before the Kerala High Court.
The High Court rejected these arguments after examining the testimony of the victim and other witnesses, along with the medical evidence.
The Court noted that the victim’s date of birth was proved as December 8, 1998, and that her status as a child under the POCSO Act was not disputed.
The Court also addressed the defence argument that the victim and appellant had been in a relationship. It held:
“When the victim is a minor, love relationship or even consensual sex would have no relevance. Therefore, this aspect also would not help the appellant/accused to get out of the prosecution.”
On the missing reference to the jackfruit tree in the scene mahazar, the Court noted the victim’s explanation that some trees had subsequently been cut and removed. It also referred to evidence showing a root projecting in a “V” shape at the relevant location.
The Court found the victim’s evidence reliable and sufficient to sustain the conviction.
Justice A. Badharudeen held that the grounds raised in the appeal lacked merit. The Court found no reason to interfere with either the conviction or sentence.
The appeal was accordingly dismissed. The 10-year sentence and ₹50,000 fine imposed by the Special Court were confirmed, and the order suspending the sentence and granting bail was cancelled.
Case Title: Reji v. State of Kerala
Case Number: Crl. Appeal No. 545 of 2025
