.webp)
The Delhi High Court has set aside the conviction of a man named Vikash in a case registered under the POCSO Act, ruling that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Justice Madhu Jain, delivering the judgment on August 4, 2026, held that the survivor's account changed significantly across three stages of the case - her police statement, her statement before a magistrate, and her testimony in court - and these differences went to the very root of the prosecution's story.
Background Of The Case
The case began in August 2023, when a mother in Delhi's Bawana area reported her daughter missing. Police initially registered a case of kidnapping. Eight days later, the girl was traced to Ambala railway station along with Vikash, her neighbour, and he was arrested.
In her first statement to police under Section 161 CrPC, the girl said she and Vikash had grown close as friends, that their families objected to the relationship, and that they had travelled to Ambala together, where physical relations took place with her consent. She also said the two got married at a temple the next day.
However, her later statement recorded before a magistrate under Section 164 CrPC told a different story - one involving threats, being taken away against her will, and being moved through several cities including Faridabad and Agra before police eventually recovered her. Her testimony during trial added further details that did not match either of her earlier versions.
Based largely on this testimony, the trial court had convicted Vikash under Sections 366, 376(2)(n) and 506(II) of the IPC, along with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, sentencing him to 20 years in prison along with other concurrent terms, and awarding the survivor Rs 10.5 lakh as compensation.
Court's Observations
Justice Jain noted that the trial court had wrongly assumed the legal presumption against the accused under Section 29 of the POCSO Act applies automatically once a case reaches trial. The court clarified that this presumption only kicks in after the prosecution first proves the basic facts of the offence through reliable evidence - something it found missing here.
The judgment pointed to several gaps in the investigation - no site plan was prepared, the alleged factory location was never properly verified, a named witness was never examined, and no call records were collected to support the claims made in court.
Referring to earlier Supreme Court rulings, including State of Uttarakhand v. Sanjay Ram Tamta and Alamelu v. State, the bench observed that while a survivor's testimony alone can be enough to convict someone, it must be consistent and believable. Where the story keeps shifting on core facts, the court said, the accused deserves the benefit of the doubt.
Decision
The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside both the conviction and the sentence, and acquitted Vikash of all charges. The court ordered his immediate release, if not required in any other case, and directed a copy of the judgment be sent to the jail authorities for compliance.
Case Details:
Case Title: Vikash vs. The State Govt of NCT Delhi & Anr.
Case Number: CRL.A. 348/2026 & CRL.M.(BAIL) 749/2026
Judge: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Madhu Jain
Decision Date: August 4, 2026
-300x169.webp)
