Dinesh Kumar Jaldhari vs State Of Chhattisgarh

2025 INSC 1317 NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 4732 OF 2025

DINESH KUMAR JALDHARI …APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

STATE OF CHHATTISGARH …RESPONDENT(S)

JUDGMENT

N.V. ANJARIA, J.

Heard learned Advocate Ms. Varnika Gupta

for the Appellant and learned Advocate Ms. Ankita

Sharma for the respondent who appeared through

video conferencing.

2. At the instance of appellant–convict, the

Signature Not Verified challenge in this present appeal is addressed to Digitally signed by RAJNI MUKHI Date: 2025.11.13 19:25:09 IST Reason: judgment and order dated 06.03.2025 of the High

Page 1 of 13 Court of Chhattisgarh in CRA No. 1348 of 2023.

Thereby the High Court dismissed the appeal before

it and confirmed judgment and order dated

18.04.2023 of learned Special Judge (POCSO),

Kunkuri, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh in Special

Case No. 17 of 2021.

2.1. Trial Court convicted the appellant under

Section 9(m) and Section 10 of the Protection of

Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and

sentenced him to seven years of rigorous

imprisonment and further imposed a fine of Rs.

2,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo

further normal imprisonment for one year.

3. Stated in nutshell, as the prosecution case goes,

the incident of commission of crime took place on

15.08.2021. The mother of the victim reported that

her husband returned home with one Virendra and

appellant Dinesh Ram, after collecting the coal

wood. It was around 4:30 p.m. when the mother of

the victim went inside to give food to the appellant

Page 2 of 13 and at that time, she found that the appellant had

wore only half short (Chadda) and was sitting near

the legs of her minor daughter aged 4 years. On

being questioned and confronted by the mother, the

appellant fled away. The mother (PW-3) noticed that

the clothing of her daughter had gone inappropriate,

and that her daughter was crying in pain. The victim

told her that she had pain in her private part. The

mother found the private part of the daughter to be

wet.

3.1. On the same day an FIR bearing Crime No.

52 of 2021 was registered with Duldula Police

Station, Jashpur, Chhattisgarh by the mother of the

victim Sukanti Bai (PW-3) against the appellant

under Section 376, 376 AB of the Indian Penal Code,

1860 and under Section 5 and 6 of the Protection of

Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012

(hereinafter referred to as ‘POCSO Act’). The victim

was sent for medical examination and came to be

examined by Dr. Priyanka Toppo (PW-6), her

statement came to be recorded under Section 164 of

Page 3 of 13 the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the

Judicial Magistrate. The appellant came to be

arrested.

3.2. The birth certificate of the victim seized by

the police reflected that the date of birth of the victim

was 13.02.2017, establishing that the age of the

victim was between 4 to 5 years. A chargesheet was

filed in respect of the offences under IPC and under

the POCSO Act as mentioned above. At the end of

the trial the appellant was convicted and sentenced

under the POCSO Act, which conviction and

sentence, was confirmed by the High Court.

4. On behalf of the appellant, assailing the

impugned judgment and order convicting and

sentencing the appellant, it was mainly contended

that there were no eyewitnesses to fortify the

occurrence of incident and the narration of the

incident by the mother (PW-3) of the victim was not

supported by independent evidence. Nowhere there

were any marks of any external injury on the victim,

Page 4 of 13 nor there was bleeding on her private part as per the

Medical Officer (PW-6) evidence, submitted learned

advocate for the appellant. It was next submitted

that the redness in the vagina seen could happen by

rubbing over the clothes by the victim or due to

infection. It was therefore vehemently submitted

that the appellant deserved benefit of doubt and

should have been acquitted.

4.1. On the other hand, learned advocate for the

State of Chhattisgarh supported the conviction and

sentence, to submit that they were based on clear

facts, cogent circumstances and reliable evidence.

5. While examining the merits of conviction

and sentence of the appellant, the material evidence

may be usefully noticed which offers a detailed

account of the incident. Father (PW-2) and mother

(PW-3) of the victim were consistent. Their evidence

offers a detailed account of the incident. Both PW-3

and PW-2 deposed that PW-2 with the appellant and

his brother had gone to forest to take coal wood.

Page 5 of 13 They came back at 2 p.m. and had liquor at the

house of PW-2 and PW-3. Thereafter, PW-3 gave food

to Virendra. Dinesh was inside. After giving food,

PW-3 and her husband PW-2 were sitting outside

their house. Virendra came out after eating the food.

The victim daughter aged 4 years was sleeping in the

house.

5.1. It was further stated that at about 4:30

p.m. PW-3 went inside to give food to the appellant.

At that time, she saw the appellant wearing half

shorts, sitting near the legs of the minor daughter.

When asked what he was doing there, the appellant

stood up and ran away. According to PW-3, the

underwear of her daughter was down till her knees,

and the frock was pulled up to the chest. She also

stated that she called her husband by ringing an

alarm and immediately, her husband came out to

catch hold the accused who was running away and,

hit him near the courtyard with a stick twice, but

the appellant managed to flee. The crying daughter

when asked about what had happened, she told in

Page 6 of 13 rural language that she had pain in her private part.

PW-3 stated that the appellant was from her colony

and she knew him. There is no good reason not to

disbelieve the details revealed and the narration

given about the incident by PW-3 - mother of the

victim.

5.2. It may be true that Dr. Priyanka Toppo (PW-

6) did not find external injury marks on the victim’s

body and stated that there was no bleeding of any

kind. According to Medical Officer Dr. Nitish Anand

(PW-8), the appellant was capable of having an

intercourse. It is well settled that the medical

evidence will take a backseat and even if do not

corroborate with the ocular evidence, where the

ocular evidence is consistent and cogent, the later

would be allowed to prevail. In the medical evidence

in the instant case, the redness in the vagina of the

victim was noticed. In any way the Court is inclined

to hold that the account of the incident given by PW-

3 – the mother inspires confidence and deserves to

be accepted.

Page 7 of 13 5.3. The victim was brought in the witness-box.

In paragraph 18 of the judgment, the High Court has

highlighted the sequence of events that took place in

course of the evidence of the victim (PW-1). PW-1

was studying at Anganwadi. Upon being found that

the PW-1 understood the questions and was capable

of deposing, she was subjected to evidentiary

examination.

5.4. The very account of the evidence recorded

by the trial court forming part of the record is

reproduced hereinbelow,

“1/ Witness was shown the Accused present in the Court, who was standing behind the curtains, after getting his mask removed as to whether she identifies that person, then Witness stated that yes, on asking about his name she stated nothing and started getting frightened and did not look at the Accused.

2/ On seeing the fright of the Victim, Accused was sent out of the Courtroom and Evidence was stopped for a while to make the Victim normal.

3/ After 15 Minutes, Victim was again enquired normally but she not give any answer and that is why this evidence is being stopped again for one hour.

Sd/-

16/11/2021 (Ajit Kumar Rajbhanu) Special Judge Kunkuri…”

Page 8 of 13 “Again (At 1:45)

4/ Victim was called again for evidence with her mother, Victim is not giving any answers and is crying and even after many efforts, she is not telling anything before this Court. Hence, Examination of the Witness is closed on this point.

Cross Examination by Mr. Bishnu Prasad Kuldeep, Counsel for the Accused.

5/ Nil.

Statement read over to the Witness Accepted as Correct Typed on my instructions

Sd/ Sd/ 16/11/2021 16/11/2021 (Ajit Kumar Rajbhanu) (Ajit Kumar Rajbhanu) Special Judge Kunkuri Special Judge Kunkuri”

5.5. It is manifest from the above that when the

accused present in court removed his mask, the

victim got frightened and did not even look at the

accused. The victim was required to be sent out of

the courtroom, and recording of the evidence was

stopped. When the victim was found to be normal

after some time, the recording of evidence though

commenced had to be discontinued having regard to

the mental status of the victim (PW-1). It is recorded

as could be noticed, that at the time when the victim

was called again for tendering her evidence with her

mother, she was crying and was not able to speak

anything in the court as the victim PW-1 was Page 9 of 13 frightened by the presence of the accused. Hence,

her examination was closed.

5.6. The fact that the victim was in a frightened

state upon seeing the accused is a pointer in itself.

The whole sequence of events in course of recording

of evidence of PW-1, was tale-telling. The shock

related to the happening of the incident which

continued with the victim post-incident made its

statement in the trauma-filled behaviour of the

victim who was a 4 year-old girl.

6. Section 7 of the POCSO Act defines sexual

assault and Section 8 is the punishment for the said

offence, which is imprisonment of either description

for a term to be not less than three years, and which

may extend to five years, with fine. The offence of

aggravated sexual assault is Section 9. The

punishment for the aggravated sexual offence is

provided in Section 10, which is the imprisonment

for a term not to be less than 5 years, and the same

may extend to 7 years and shall also be liable to pay

Page 10 of 13 the fine. In the present case the appellant is

convicted under Section 9(m), the trial court and the

High Court having concurrently found that that the

appellant had committed sexual assault on a child

below 12 years, which falls under Section 9 read

with Section 10.

7. The evidence highlighted above go to

establish the commission of offence. The

appreciation of evidence of the trial court and

consideration thereof by the High Court could be

said to be eminently legal and proper, warranting no

interference by this Court.

8. A vain attempt was made on behalf of the

appellant to press the aspect that there was no

suggestion of, much less evidence of penetration in

the sexual assault by the appellant and therefore the

conviction and sentence was not justified. The Court

is not impressed with this submission, given the

facts and evidence on record.

Page 11 of 13

9. The conviction of the appellant recorded by

the trial court and affirmed by the High Court is

resultantly upheld. At the same time, the sentence

imposed on the appellant is of 7 years’ rigorous

imprisonment which is maximum sentence

prescribed under Section 10 of the POCSO Act. The

appellant has so far undergone imprisonment for

about 4 years and 5 months. In the totality of the

facts and circumstances, the Court is inclined to

reduce the sentence requiring the appellant to

undergo the rigorous imprisonment for 6 years,

instead. The imposition of fine of Rs. 6000/- and the

simple imprisonment of one year in default of

payment of fine would stand.

10. The judgment and order of the High Court

is modified to above limited extent by substituting

the sentence as above.

11. The appeal is partly allowed to the said

extent.

Page 12 of 13 In view of the disposal of the appeal as

above, all pending interlocutory applications would

not survive and are accordingly disposed of.

…………………………………..,J.

[ARAVIND KUMAR]

…………………………………..,J.

[N.V. ANJARIA]

NEW DELHI;

November 13, 2025.

(JS)

Page 13 of 13