Rajnish v. State NCT of Delhi, 2025
This judgment reinforces the protective intent of the POCSO Act, emphasizing that the minor victim’s vulnerability necessitates strict scrutiny of consent and the accused’s conduct. The Court clarifies that:
Judgement Details
Court
Delhi High Court
Date of Decision
29 September 2025
Judges
Justice Sanjeev Narula
Citation
Acts / Provisions
Facts of the Case
-
The accused, a 21-year-old, was convicted of raping a 14-year-old minor girl.
-
The victim initially did not describe the sexual acts as forcible in her first statements, at one point even describing them as consensual in the Medical Legal Case (MLC) report.
-
The victim’s earlier statements also included claims that she was in love with the accused, had voluntarily left home, and had married him.
-
However, two days later, the victim changed her statement before the Magistrate and alleged that the accused had forcibly taken her away and established physical relations against her will.
-
The accused challenged his conviction on the basis of the inconsistencies in the victim’s statements.
Issues
-
Whether the victim’s initial failure to describe the acts as forcible affects the accused’s liability under the POCSO Act?
-
Whether discrepancies or inconsistencies in the victim’s statements undermine the prosecution’s case?
-
Whether the consent plea holds any value in cases involving a minor under the POCSO Act?
-
The impact of medical evidence (pregnancy) on confirming the offence?
Judgement
-
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of the accused.
-
The Court stated: “Even if the Prosecutrix did not characterise the sexual acts as forcible in her earliest accounts, or even described them as consensual in her MLC, such statements do not exculpate the accused.”
-
The age and maturity disparity between the accused and the minor victim increases the likelihood of influence or manipulation, which the POCSO Act aims to protect against.
-
The Court noted that the plea of consent is immaterial where the victim is a minor under the POCSO Act.
-
The victim’s testimony was found consistent and credible, despite minor discrepancies.
-
Medical evidence confirming pregnancy during the relevant period corroborated the case of repeated penetrative sexual assault under Sections 5(j)(ii) and 5(l) of the POCSO Act.
-
The accused was sentenced to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment.
-
The Court ordered that DSLSA facilitate the disbursement of Rs. 7 lakh compensation awarded to the victim by the trial court.
Held
-
The Discrepancies in initial victim statements do not absolve the accused.
-
Consent is immaterial in sexual offences involving minors under the POCSO Act.
-
The conviction under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) IPC, and Sections 5(l), 5(j)(ii) POCSO Act is upheld.
-
The Compensation to victim to be disbursed by DSLSA.
Analysis
- This judgment reinforces the protective intent of the POCSO Act, emphasizing that the minor victim’s vulnerability necessitates strict scrutiny of consent and the accused’s conduct. The Court clarifies that:
-
Victim’s initial silence or inconsistent characterization of the acts should not be used to exculpate the accused.
-
Medical evidence plays a critical role in substantiating allegations of sexual assault.
-
The ruling underlines the irrelevance of consent for minors, recognizing their inability to provide informed consent under the law.
-
The decision strengthens child protection laws and highlights the judiciary’s role in ensuring justice for vulnerable victims.