“Section 6, on its plain language, leaves no discretion to the Court and there is no option but to impose the minimum sentence”: Chattisgarh High Court
April 23, 2024 2024-04-30 11:58“Section 6, on its plain language, leaves no discretion to the Court and there is no option but to impose the minimum sentence”: Chattisgarh High Court
“Section 6, on its plain language, leaves no discretion to the Court and there is no option but to impose the minimum sentence”: Chattisgarh High Court
By Praneetha Shivaprasad
A Division Bench of the Chattisgarh High Court upheld the conviction of the appellant under Section 5(l)/6 of the POCSO Act and Sections 363 and 366A of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant challenged the conviction by stating that the age of the victim was not conclusively determined and the consent of the victim was not considered by the lower court. The appeal was dismissed by the High Court by considering the age as recorded in the school register, which can conclusively determine the age of the survivor according to Section 35 of the Indian Evidence Act, since the school entries were recorded by a Public Servant. The age of the survivor at the time of the offence was 12 years. Hence, the court ruled that consent cannot be a consideration. Since the rape occurred multiple times, and the testimony of the prosecutrix was considered to be reliable, the conviction for aggravated penetrative sexual assault was upheld.
