Deepanker Tikedar vs State Of Chhattisgarh

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.5028 OF 2025 (Arising out of S.L.P.(Crl.)No.9598 of 2025)

DEEPANKAR TIKEDAR … Appellant

VERSUS

STATE OF CHHATISGARH … Respondent

ORDER

Rajesh Bindal, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. In the present appeal, the judgment of the High Court 1 in

CRA No. 1916 of 2023 dated 25.09.2024, has been impugned, whereby

conviction of the appellant under Section 376(3) of the Indian Penal

Code, 18722 and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual

Offences Act, 20123 was upheld. Sentence of life imprisonment until

natural death, as awarded by the Trial Court, was also upheld.

3. The brief facts of the case are that FIR No. 08/2022 dated Signature Not Verified

04.05.2022 was registered against the appellant for the offences Digitally signed by ANITA MALHOTRA Date: 2025.12.04 18:52:25 IST Reason:

1 High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur 2 Hereinafter, “IPC” 3 Hereinafter, “POCSO Act” 1 committed under Section 375 of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO

Act. After trial, the appellant was convicted under Section 376(3) of the

IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to life imprisonment

until natural death by the Trial Court in Special Sessions (POCSO) Case

No. 29/2022 vide judgement dated 13.07.2023. In appeal before the

High Court,4 the judgment of conviction and order of sentence were

upheld.

4. Learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that he does

not wish to contest the conviction of the appellant. However, in the light

of facts and circumstances, indulgence is sought from this Court for

awarding a limited period sentence instead of life imprisonment till

natural death. He further submitted that the appellant has no other

criminal antecedents and his conduct in the jail has been satisfactory as

there have been no complaints against him during his period of custody.

5. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the State submitted

that it is a case in which the appellant has spoiled the life of a minor girl

who was merely 15 to 16 years of age at the time when the offence was

committed. Considering the aforesaid fact, the appellant does not

deserve to be granted any leniency by this Court.

6. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the

relevant records.

4 Criminal Appeal (CRA) No. 1916 of 2023 2

7. It is not in dispute that the appellant herein has been

convicted under Section 376(3) of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO

Act and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment till natural death. The

offence is also grievous. However, considering the age of the appellant

and also that there are no antecedents and further his conduct during

custody has been satisfactory, the sentence of life imprisonment till

natural death can be converted to limited period. We hereby reduce the

sentence awarded to the appellant to a fixed term of 25 years actual

imprisonment without remission. This court can exercise such a power in

view of law laid down in Shiva Kumar @ Shiva @ Shivamurthy v.

State of Karnataka.

8. For the reasons mentioned above, the criminal appeal is

partially allowed. The impugned order passed by the High Court is

modified to the extent mentioned above.

9. Pending application also stands disposed of.

.........................................J. (RAJESH BINDAL)

..........................................J. (MANMOHAN) NEW DELHI;

November 25, 2025.

3