Minor Not Labelling Sexual Acts As Forceful In Initial Statements Can't Exculpate Accused Under POCSO Act: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has observed that the act of a minor victim not calling the sexual acts as forcible in her initial statements cannot exculpate the accused under the POCSO Act.

While upholding the conviction of a 21 year old in a case of raping a 14 year old minor girl, Justice Sanjeev Narula said:

“….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 Court said that the disparity in age and maturity magnified the likelihood of influence or manipulation, a risk the POCSO Act is designed precisely to guard against.

It dismissed the convict's appeal against the trial court order convicting him for the offences under Sections 363, 366, and 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 5(l) of the POCSO Act. He was sentenced to undergo 10 years of rigorous imprisonment.

The conviction was challenged on the ground that the Prosecutrix remained inconsistent across her various statements.

It was submitted that in her initial statement recorded by the police, she said that she was in love with the convict, had voluntarily left her home and had married him. However, in her subsequent statement recorded before the Magistrate just two days later, she changed her version and said that the convict had forcibly taken her away and had established physical relations with her against her will.

Rejecting the plea, the Court said that the alleged discrepancies in the victim's statements do not advance the defence, adding that in the prosecutions under the POCSO Act, the plea of “consent” is immaterial where the victim is a minor.

The Court also said that the Prosecutrix's testimony could not be doubted or deemed unreliable and that her statements disclosed a consistent and coherent core.

“The medical record confirming pregnancy during the relevant period, when read alongside the Prosecutrix's consistent narrative, establishes beyond reasonable doubt that the Appellant subjected her to repeated penetrative sexual assault. These facts squarely bring the case within Section 5(j)(ii) (pregnancy resulting from penetrative sexual assault)14 and Section 5(l) (repeated penetrative sexual assault) of the POCSO Act, punishable under Section 6,” the Court said.

It added that DSLSA shall facilitate the disbursement of the compensation of Rs. 7 lakh awarded to the Prosecutrix by the Trial Court.

Title: RAJNISH v. STATE NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1228

Click here to read order