The Sikkim High Court has upheld the conviction of men for aggravated sexual assault under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. Justice Bhaskar Raj Pradhan dismissed his appeal, holding that two separate acts of touching a child's breasts during the same occurrence were sufficient to attract Section 9(l) of the Act.
The Court also declined to reduce the five-year prison sentence, which was the minimum punishment prescribed under Section 10 of the POCSO Act.
Background
The appeal challenged a judgment dated June 10, 2025, and the sentencing order dated June 16, 2025, passed by the Special Judge under the POCSO Act.
According to the prosecution, the incident occurred on December 14, 2023, when the survivor was eating at home. The appellant allegedly approached her from behind and touched her breasts. When she reacted, he stepped back but allegedly returned and repeated the act.
The Special Court convicted him under Section 9(l), punishable under Section 10 of the POCSO Act, and sentenced him to five years of rigorous imprisonment with a fine of ₹2,000. It also recommended ₹15,000 in compensation for the survivor.
The appellant's counsel challenged the conviction by pointing to differences in the accounts given by the survivor and her parents, including the description and timing of the incident. The defence also argued that the prosecution had failed to establish the repeated acts necessary to classify the offence as aggravated sexual assault and questioned the proof of the survivor's birth certificate.
The State opposed the appeal, maintaining that the prosecution had established its case beyond reasonable doubt.
Justice Bhaskar Raj Pradhan examined the survivor's testimony, her earlier statement before a Magistrate, the medical evidence and the evidence concerning her age. The Court found her account consistent and reliable, noting that the defence had failed to undermine its central details during cross-examination.
On the central legal issue, the Court observed that the two acts were sufficient to satisfy the statutory requirement of repeated sexual assault. It held that the evidence established the necessary sexual intent and supported the conviction under Section 9(l).
The judgment explained that “the two separate acts of touching the survivor's breasts” during the same occurrence established the relevant ingredients of aggravated sexual assault.
The Court also rejected the argument that discrepancies in the witnesses' accounts undermined the prosecution's case. It observed that minor variations did not affect the core of the allegations, particularly when the survivor's account remained consistent.
Regarding the survivor's age, the Court relied on the birth certificate, parental testimony and supporting official records to conclude that she was a child when the incident occurred.
The High Court held that the Special Court had correctly convicted the appellant and imposed the minimum sentence prescribed by law. It declined to reduce the sentence on the ground of the appellant's family circumstances.
The appeal was dismissed, the conviction and sentence were upheld, and the recommendation of ₹15,000 compensation for the survivor under the Sikkim Compensation to Victims (or their Dependents) Scheme, 2021, was confirmed.
