The Delhi High Court upheld a man's POCSO conviction, holding that minor variations in a child's testimony are natural and cannot discredit the core sexual assault allegation. The court emphasised that a child victim's testimony is paramount.
Minor variations in a child's expression cannot eclipse the core allegation of sexual assault, the Delhi High Court held while upholding the conviction of a man under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The Court emphasised that the testimony of a child victim must be appreciated in light of the tender age and limited vocabulary of the witness.
In a judgment delivered on January 5, 2026, Justice Neena Bansal Krishna dismissed the criminal appeal challenging the trial court's verdict that had found the appellant guilty of aggravated sexual assault. The bench reiterated that conviction can rest on the sole testimony of a child victim if it is consistent, credible and inspires confidence.
Court Rejects Defense Arguments
The High Court rejected arguments pointing to alleged contradictions, delay in lodging the FIR, absence of medical corroboration, and claims of tutoring. It noted that the brief delay was adequately explained, given the social realities surrounding reporting of child sexual abuse, particularly when the accused is a known person.
On Counselling and Tutoring Claims
Counselling by child welfare authorities, the Court clarified, is meant to provide emotional support and cannot automatically be construed as tutoring.
On Medical Corroboration
On medical evidence, the Court observed that where the allegation involves sexual touching rather than penetration, the absence of injuries does not weaken the prosecution's case.
Minor deviations in a young child's statements were held to be natural and not material enough to discredit an otherwise reliable account of the incident.
Conviction and Sentence Upheld
While affirming the seven-year rigorous imprisonment awarded under Section 10 of the POCSO Act, the High Court set aside the conviction under Sections 354/354A/354B of the IPC, noting that no specific charges under those provisions had been framed. With this limited modification, the appeal was dismissed and the POCSO conviction was upheld. (ANI)
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianet Newsable English staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)