In a significant ruling, the Chhattisgarh High Court upheld the conviction and sentence of Abhishek Ratre, who was found guilty under Sections 363, 366, and 376(3) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 4(2) and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. The division bench comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal dismissed the appeal filed by the accused, affirming the trial court’s judgment.
Background of the Case
The case originated from an FIR filed on March 14, 2021, by the mother of the victim at the Khamtarai Police Station, Raipur. According to the complaint, the minor girl, aged 14 years, 7 months, and 11 days, went missing on February 19, 2021. The police launched an investigation and eventually recovered the victim from the possession of the accused in Ahmednagar, Maharashtra.
During the investigation, the victim’s school admission records were seized, confirming her minor status. The medical examination and forensic reports corroborated the prosecution’s claims of sexual assault. The trial court convicted the accused and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for various durations under different sections of IPC and POCSO Act, including 20 years for aggravated sexual assault.
Legal Issues Involved
Reliability of Victim’s Sole Testimony: The appellant argued that there was no corroborative evidence and that the victim was a consenting party. The court, however, relied on Supreme Court precedents that hold a minor’s testimony, if credible, as sufficient for conviction.
Determination of Victim’s Age: The appellant challenged the victim’s age, contending that school records were insufficient proof. However, the court upheld the authenticity of the school’s admission register as per the Juvenile Justice Act guidelines.
Consent in Sexual Offences Involving Minors: The court reaffirmed that under the POCSO Act, consent of a minor is legally irrelevant, emphasizing the protective intent of the legislation.
Court’s Observations
The High Court extensively cited Supreme Court rulings, emphasizing the significance of a child witness’s testimony. Quoting the landmark case of Rai Sandeep @ Deenu v. State of NCT of Delhi (2012), the court stated:
“A sterling witness should be of a very high quality and caliber whose version should, therefore, be unassailable. The court should be in a position to accept it for its face value without any hesitation.”
In reaffirming the victim’s testimony, the bench ruled:
“The Court can rely upon the testimony of a minor witness, and it can form the basis of conviction if the same is credible, truthful, and corroborated by other evidence brought on record.”
Final Judgment
Dismissing the appeal, the High Court upheld the trial court’s sentence, stating that the prosecution had proved the case beyond a reasonable doubt. The court underscored that the appellant abducted the minor, kept her in unlawful custody, and repeatedly subjected her to sexual assault, leading to her pregnancy and childbirth.
“Children are precious human resources of our country; they deserve full protection and greater care. Crimes against minors are crimes against humanity and must be dealt with stringently.”
The court directed the jail authorities to ensure that the appellant serves his full sentence and informed him of his right to appeal before the Supreme Court.
