Skip to main content
← back
Informative

Delhi High Court Reduces Sentence in POCSO Case; Conviction Under Section 6 POCSO Set Aside.

Update / Judgement Date

13 Oct 2025

Source

WCP News Bulletin

Author

Sakshi Bhardwaj — WCP Legal Desk

Reading Time

2 min read

Criminal LawOther Legal Matters
Delhi High Court Reduces Sentence in POCSO Case; Conviction Under Section 6 POCSO Set Aside.
WCP News Bulletin

Headnote:

The Delhi High Court partially allowed the criminal appeal of Ram Krishan Singh @ Dadu, convicted by the Sessions Court for offences under Sections 6, 10 POCSO, and Section 506 IPC. The Court set aside his conviction under Section 6 POCSO while upholding the conviction under Section 10 POCSO. Sentence under Section 10 POCSO was retained at five years rigorous imprisonment (RI). Considering time already served, the appellant was directed to be released forthwith unless required in connection with any other case.


Background:

  1. Appellant convicted by Sessions Court dated 27.03.2024 for sexual offences against his 10-year-old niece.
  2. Sentences: 12 years RI under Section 6 POCSO; 5 years RI under Section 10 POCSO; 1 year SI under Section 506 IPC; all sentences to run concurrently.
  3. Appeal filed challenging conviction, sentence, and procedural aspects.


Facts:

  1. Child victim aged 10 years; appellant, her uncle, residing with family from August 2018.
  2. Incidents alleged between January 2019 and February 2019, involving inappropriate touching and penetration.
  3. Disclosure made to tuition teacher, who informed the mother; complaint filed on 23.02.2019.
  4. MLC conducted on 24.02.2019 showed no injuries; hymen intact; FSL report inconclusive.


Contentions of Appellant:

  1. Child victim’s testimony inconsistent with statements of mother and tuition teacher.
  2. MLC and FSL did not support charges; no seizure of bedsheets or clothes.
  3. Suggested false implication due to alleged monetary dispute regarding driving tempo.
  4. Claimed incidents did not constitute penetrative sexual assault, at best showing offence under Section 7 POCSO (punishable under Section 10).


Prosecution Contentions:

  1. Child’s testimony consistent; specific dates and details provided.
  2. Presumption under Section 29 POCSO applicable; appellant failed to rebut.
  3. Material witnesses corroborated allegations of inappropriate touching.


Observations of Court:

  1. Child victim’s competency to depose confirmed.
  2. Contradictions noted between testimony of child, mother, and tuition teacher regarding exact dates and acts of penetration.
  3. MLC and FSL reports did not corroborate penetration; only inappropriate touching supported.
  4. Appellant’s claim of monetary dispute unsubstantiated by father (DW-2) and other witnesses.


Decision:

  1. Conviction under Section 6 POCSO (penetrative sexual assault) set aside.
  2. Conviction under Section 10 POCSO (sexual assault) upheld.
  3. Sentence for Section 10 POCSO: 5 years RI. Considering time already served (over six and a half years), appellant directed to be released forthwith.
  4. Fine remains unpaid but considered covered by time served.


Coram:

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri