"Men Are Not Improved By Injuries": Chhattisgarh High Court Reduces Child Rape Convict's Sentence To 20 Years

The Chhattisgarh High Court has upheld the conviction of a man for the rape of a six-year-old girl under Section 376AB of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, but reduced his sentence from imprisonment for life till natural death to rigorous imprisonment for twenty years. The Court observed that while punishment must be proportionate to the gravity of the offence, sentencing should also take into account the reformative theory of punishment, noting the Supreme Court's observation that "men are not improved by injuries." [2026LiveLaw (Chh) 66]

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal was hearing a criminal appeal challenging the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, convicting the appellant for raping a six-year-old girl. According to the prosecution, the victim disclosed to her mother that the appellant, their neighbour, had taken her to his house and committed sexual assault. The trial court convicted the appellant under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and Section 376AB IPC and sentenced him to imprisonment for life till natural death. The appellant contended that the prosecution had failed to establish its case beyond a reasonable doubt, pointing to alleged contradictions in the evidence of the victim and other witnesses.

The Court affirmed the findings of guilt. It held that the prosecution had satisfactorily established that the victim was about six years old through her birth certificate and school records. It further held that the testimony of the child victim inspired confidence and was corroborated by her mother. The Court reiterated that the testimony of a rape victim can form the sole basis for conviction if it inspires confidence and that even slight penetration is sufficient to constitute the offence of rape.

While considering the sentence, the Court observed that the trial court had imposed the maximum punishment prescribed under Section 6 of the POCSO Act. Referring to the Supreme Court's decisions, the Court observed that sentencing must balance the gravity of the offence with the principles of proportionality and reformation. Quoting the observation in Mohammad Giasuddin Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh reported in (1977) 3 SCC 287 that "men are not improved by injuries", the Court held that the ends of justice would be met by imposing the statutory minimum sentence instead of imprisonment for life till natural death.

Accordingly, the Court upheld the appellant's conviction under Section 376AB IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act but reduced the sentence under Section 6 of the POCSO Act from imprisonment for life till natural death to rigorous imprisonment for twenty years. The fine and default sentence imposed by the trial court were maintained.

Case Title: Aman Kumar Vishwakarma v. State of Chhattisgarh [CRA No. 1754 of 2024]

Click Here To Read/Download Order

Citation:2026LiveLaw (Chh) 66