The Allahabad High Court has scaled down the life sentence handed to a man convicted of raping a five-year-old girl in Varanasi, ruling that the prosecution failed to prove the charge of penetrative sexual assault beyond reasonable doubt. A division bench of Justice Salil Kumar Rai and Justice Vinai Kumar Dwivedi partly allowed the appeal, converting the conviction to a lesser offence under the POCSO Act.
Background of the Case
The case dates back to September 7, 2017, when the victim's father lodged an FIR alleging that his daughter had come down crying from the terrace of the appellant's house, with blood noticed on her undergarments and legs. The child told her mother that the accused had taken her upstairs and done "objectionable things" (‘gandaa kaam’) with her. A trial court in Varanasi had convicted the man, Sunil, in 2022 under Section 376(2)(i) IPC and Sections 5(m) and 5(n) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, sentencing him to imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life along with a fine of Rs 50,000.
The appellant challenged the conviction before the High Court, arguing that medical evidence directly contradicted the prosecution's version of events.
Court's Observations
The bench noted that the victim's medical examination, conducted within hours of the alleged incident, found no external or internal injury and no sign of bleeding. This, the court said, was hard to reconcile with the prosecution's claim that the child had bled after the assault. The judges also pointed out that the victim's earliest statement to police made no mention of bleeding at all - that detail surfaced only in her statement recorded nearly two months later under Section 164 CrPC, which cannot be treated as substantive evidence.
The court further observed that the accused's own medical report showed no injuries either, weakening the case for penetration. It held that the trial court had erred by mechanically applying the general rule that ocular evidence outweighs medical evidence, without examining whether that principle actually fit the facts before it.
On the misuse of the statutory presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act, the bench clarified that this presumption cannot be used to justify a conviction - or a sentence - under the Indian Penal Code, since it applies only to offences specified within the POCSO Act itself. The court also flagged that the trial court had wrongly sentenced the appellant under IPC provisions instead of the POCSO Act as it stood in 2017, seemingly just to hand down the maximum punishment available.
The judges stated that while the allegation of penetration and bleeding could not be safely accepted, the child's consistent account - that the accused took her to the terrace, made her lie down, and touched her genital area - remained credible and unshaken.
The Decision
The High Court set aside the conviction under Section 376(2)(i) IPC and Sections 5(m), 5(n) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act. Instead, it convicted the appellant under Section 7 read with Sections 9(m) and 9(n), punishable under Section 10 of the POCSO Act, for aggravated sexual assault.
Since the appellant had already served over five years and eight months in custody, the court sentenced him to the period already undergone, along with the earlier fine of Rs 50,000.
The appeal was partly allowed, and his bail bonds were discharged.
Case Details:
Case Title: Sunil vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others
Case Number: Criminal Appeal No. 4676 of 2022
Judges: Justice Salil Kumar Rai and Justice Vinai Kumar Dwivedi
Decision Date: July 17, 2026
