In a significant ruling, the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur has acquitted a man who was earlier sentenced to life imprisonment under rape and POCSO charges, holding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The Division Bench found serious inconsistencies in evidence, investigative lapses, and a failure to conclusively establish the age of the prosecutrix.
The judgment was pronounced on February 4, 2026, after the court re-examined the entire trial record and rival submissions in a criminal appeal filed by the accused.
Read also:- Humiliation Is Not Justice: Allahabad High Court Strikes Down Placard Punishment for Student
Background of the Case
The appeal was filed by Lajendra Singh alias Lali, who had been convicted in December 2020 by a POCSO court in Sri Ganganagar. He was sentenced to life imprisonment under Section 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 5(l) and 6 of the POCSO Act.
The prosecution case stemmed from a complaint lodged by the mother of the prosecutrix in May 2016. It was alleged that the accused, a former sarpanch, took the girl from Sri Ganganagar to Sikar on the pretext of helping her obtain a passport and sending her abroad. During the journey and stay, he was accused of repeatedly sexually assaulting her.
Arguments Before the Court
Senior Advocate Vineet Jain, appearing for the appellant, attacked the prosecution case on multiple fronts. He argued that the most critical requirement under POCSO - proof that the victim was a minor - was not met. Though the prosecution relied on a secondary school marksheet, it failed to produce admission records of the first school attended by the prosecutrix.
“The best evidence regarding age was withheld,” the defence submitted, pointing out that both investigating officers admitted they never collected records from the first school.
The defence also highlighted contradictions in witness statements, unexplained delay in filing the FIR, non-examination of key police witnesses, and absence of CCTV footage from the hotel and passport office.
On the other hand, counsel for the complainant and the public prosecutor defended the conviction, arguing that minor inconsistencies should not overshadow the consistent testimony of the prosecutrix and her parents.
Court’s Observations
After carefully scrutinising the record, the Bench found the prosecution case riddled with gaps.
On the issue of age, the court noted that while a school marksheet can be relevant, it cannot override earlier admission records when contradictions exist. “Suppression of the best available evidence relating to age gives rise to an adverse inference against the prosecution,” the bench observed.
The judges also questioned the prosecution story that the victim was induced by promises linked to the accused’s daughter living abroad. All key witnesses admitted they had never seen or even known the daughter, making the narrative appear “artificial and constructed.”
The court expressed concern over the delay in lodging the FIR and noted that the explanation offered was inconsistent with medical and oral evidence. It also took note of diary entries showing the accused was detained even before the FIR was registered.
Medical evidence further weakened the case. The court recorded that there were no injuries suggestive of repeated forcible intercourse and that the prosecutrix had disclosed prior sexual activity, a fact not mentioned earlier.
Summing up the evidence, the bench said, “Criminal conviction cannot rest on suspicion or conjecture. Proof beyond reasonable doubt is a constitutional safeguard protecting liberty.”
Read also:- Calcutta High Court Refuses to Quash Forgery Case Linked to 1963 Land Deed, Orders Police Probe
Final Decision
Allowing the appeal, the Rajasthan High Court set aside the 2020 conviction and acquitted the accused of all charges. Since his sentence had already been suspended during the appeal, the court directed that he need not surrender, subject to furnishing bonds under Section 437A of the CrPC.
Case Title: Lajendra Singh @ Lali vs State of Rajasthan
Case No.: D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 187/2020
Case Type: Criminal Appeal (POCSO & IPC)
Decision Date: 04 February 2026
