The Orissa High Court has upheld the conviction of a man accused of sexually assaulting a minor girl on a bus, observing that the act of pressing the victim’s breast clearly demonstrates sexual intent under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
The court dismissed the criminal appeal filed by the accused and confirmed the trial court’s order sentencing him to three years of rigorous imprisonment.
Read also:- Madras High Court Acquits Man in POCSO Case, Says Failure to Prove Victim’s Age Fatally Weakens Prosecution
Justice Dr. Sanjeeb K. Panigrahi delivered the judgment on February 27, 2026.
Background of the Case
According to the prosecution, the incident took place on August 26, 2021. The victim, who was around 17 years old, was travelling with her family in a bus from Raikia to G. Udayagiri in Odisha.
While the bus was halted near UCO Bank Chowk, an individual approached from outside the bus and allegedly inserted his hand through the window and squeezed the girl’s breast. The victim immediately raised an alarm.
Her father got down from the bus to catch the man, but the accused allegedly assaulted him and fled from the spot. A police complaint was subsequently lodged, leading to the registration of a criminal case.
During investigation, police verified documents related to the victim’s age and found that she was 17 years, 5 months and 8 days old at the time of the incident.
The trial court later convicted the accused under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code (outraging modesty) and Section 8 of the POCSO Act (sexual assault). However, he was acquitted of the robbery charge.
Appeal Before the High Court
The accused challenged the conviction before the High Court, arguing that the trial court had misinterpreted evidence.
His counsel pointed to inconsistencies in witness statements and argued that several independent witnesses, including the bus driver and conductor, did not support the prosecution case.
The defence also argued that the alleged act was improbable because the accused supposedly committed it from outside the bus window.
Court’s Observations
The High Court closely examined the evidence, including the victim’s testimony and the documents proving her age.
The bench held that school records and matriculation certificates are reliable proof of age, and there was no evidence presented by the defence to challenge those documents.
The court therefore confirmed that the victim was a minor at the time of the incident, which made the provisions of the POCSO Act applicable.
The judge further clarified the legal meaning of sexual assault under Section 7 of the POCSO Act.
“The act of pressing the breast of a child with sexual intent involves physical contact and clearly falls within the definition of sexual assault under the statute,” the court observed.
The court also noted that skin-to-skin contact is not required to establish sexual assault under the POCSO Act.
Reliance on Victim’s Testimony
The High Court emphasized that the testimony of the victim was credible and trustworthy.
It found that her statement remained consistent and was supported by surrounding circumstances, including the immediate alarm raised in the bus and the actions taken by her father.
The court noted that even though some witnesses turned hostile, their testimonies still confirmed that the girl raised an alarm and that her father attempted to apprehend the accused.
Such circumstances, the court said, provided corroboration to the victim’s account.
The bench also remarked that reluctance of independent witnesses to testify fully in sensitive cases is not uncommon and cannot automatically weaken the prosecution’s case.
Court’s Decision
After evaluating the evidence and legal provisions, the High Court concluded that the prosecution had successfully proved the charges beyond reasonable doubt.
The court held that the accused had used criminal force on a minor girl with the intention of outraging her modesty and committing sexual assault.
“The testimony of the prosecutrix inspires full judicial confidence and remains free from material contradictions,” the bench stated while affirming the conviction.
Accordingly, the court dismissed the criminal appeal and upheld the trial court’s judgment and sentence of three years’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of ₹5,000.
Case Title: Abinash Digal @ Papun Digal v. State of Odisha
Case No.: CRLA No. 1051 of 2024
Decision Date: 27 February 2026.
