'Partial Penetration Suffices Under POCSO': Sikkim High Court Upholds Conviction Of 60-Year-Old Man For Sexually Assaulting 5-Yr-Old
The Sikkim High Court upheld the conviction of a 60-year-old accused for committing aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a five-year-old child under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) Division Bench of Justice Meenakshi Madan Rai and Justice Bhaskar Raj remarked that: “...having prima facie found that, the Appellant, aged about sixty years, had...
The Sikkim High Court upheld the conviction of a 60-year-old accused for committing aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a five-year-old child under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act)
Division Bench of Justice Meenakshi Madan Rai and Justice Bhaskar Raj remarked that: “...having prima facie found that, the Appellant, aged about sixty years, had committed an offence of aggravated penetrative sexual assault, on the minor victim...”
Consequently, the sentence imposed under Section 3(b) and Section 5(m) of the POCSO Act with penalty prescribed under Section 4 and Section 6 of the POCSO Act respectively, is upheld and ordered to run concurrently.”
Background:
The case originated from an FIR lodged on 5 September 2020, alleging that the accused had sexually assaulted his five-year-old niece near her residence. Following investigation, a chargesheet was filed under relevant provisions of the POCSO Act. The Trial Court convicted the accused under Sections 3(b) and 5(m) of the Act and sentenced him to 20 years of imprisonment.
Before the High Court, the appellant did not dispute the occurrence of sexual assault or the age of the victim. His primary argument was that the act did not amount to “penetrative sexual assault” and therefore warranted a lesser punishment under Section 8 of the POCSO Act instead of the enhanced punishment imposed by the Trial Court.
Evaluating the testimony of the child, the court observed that her statement was clear, consistent, and free from material contradictions. The victim unequivocally described the act of the accused inserting his finger into her vagina, which caused her pain. The Court held that despite her young age, her testimony inspired confidence and remained unshaken during cross-examination, thereby constituting reliable evidence of both sexual assault and penetration.
Further the Court found substantial corroboration in the testimony of the eye-witness, who had directly seen the accused engaging in inappropriate acts with the child, including fondling her private parts and behaving in a sexually abusive manner.
Also, as per the medical evidence, the doctor noted fresh injuries in the genital and anal regions of the child, including abrasions and a tear, and opined that sexual violence could not be ruled out.
The Court reiterated that according to Section 3(b) of the POCSO Act, 'penetrative sexual assault' would mean "insertion of any object or part of the body, ought to be to any extent into the vagina, urethra or anus of the child" and full penetration is not required. Thus, based on the victim's testimony and supporting evidence, the Court held that the act of digital penetration squarely fell within this definition.
Further the Court noted that since the victim was below twelve years of age, the offence clearly attracted Section 5(m) of the POCSO Act, which deals with aggravated penetrative sexual assault.
Thus, the High Court upheld the sentence.
Case Name: Krishna Chhetri v/s State of Sikkim
Case No.: Crl. A. No.20 of 2024
Date of Decision: 21.04.2026