'Child's Dignity Was Shattered': Odisha Court Sentences Tutor To 20-Years Imprisonment For Sexually Abusing Minor Boy
A POCSO Court in Odisha held a home tutor guilty of repeatedly sexually assaulting his student–a minor boy, and sentenced the former to 20 years rigorous imprisonment remarking that the child who should have spent his time in cheerfulness was dealt with animal passion and his dignity was shattered. In doing so the court remarked that the testimony of the boy, who had come forward at the risk...
A POCSO Court in Odisha held a home tutor guilty of repeatedly sexually assaulting his student–a minor boy, and sentenced the former to 20 years rigorous imprisonment remarking that the child who should have spent his time in cheerfulness was dealt with animal passion and his dignity was shattered.
In doing so the court remarked that the testimony of the boy, who had come forward at the risk of his reputation, was of "sterling quality" which was enough to convict the accused.
Terming the act as unacceptable and heinous conduct from a teacher, Special Judge Prasant Kumar Das remarked–
“A seven years old boy who was supposed to spend time in cheerfulness was dealt with animal passion and his dignity and purity of physical frame was shattered. The plague [(sic) plight] of the child and the shock suffered by him can be well visualized. The torment on the child has the potentiality to corrode the poise and equanimity of any civilized society. The age old saying “child is a gift of the God” enters into the realm of absurdity.”
As per the prosecution the minor boy, who was around seven years old at the time of the incident, told his parents that the accused–who used to teach the minor Urdu as a private tutor, had asked him several times to perform oral sex. It was alleged that the accused used to threaten the boy of dire consequences due to which he had not reveal the fact to his parents.
Upon learning about the incident, the boy's parents immediately went to the police station and lodged an FIR at 01:00 AM. Upon completion of investigation, the police filed a charge-sheet against the accused on 21.10.2025 for commission of offence under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, which punishes aggravated penetrative sexual assault.
During the trial, the prosecution examined 9 witnesses, including the minor and his parents, and proved 11 exhibited documents. To prove minor age of the boy, his original birth certificate was produced which revealed his date of birth as 26.09.2018.
Meanwhile the defence pointed out a delay of eight months in lodging the FIR, alleging that it creates suspicion on the veracity of the prosecution's case. However, the Court outrightly rejected such contention by observing–
“As the accused had threatened to assault and punish the victim, out of fear, his son (victim) had not informed them. On knowing the incident, he immediately went to PS and reported the matter at 1.00 AM (night). Similarly, PW 5, the mother of victim deposed in Court that her son, the victim boy-PW 6 one day when there was no current in house, told the incident to her…I find the explanation to be satisfactory. Therefore, when in such a situation, the delay has taken place in lodging the FIR. The benefit of such delay cannot be given to the accused who as such the tuition teacher of the victim boy.”
The defence also alleged that the prosecution version on the alleged discrepancy in the testimonies of the minor and his parents vis-à-vis the period of occurrence. The Court, nevertheless, brushed aside such discrepancy holding it to be immaterial and non-fatal to the prosecution case.
The defence further submitted that a false case has been foisted upon the accused by the informant in order to avoid paying outstanding tuition fees. It argued that there was animosity between the accused and the minor's family. However, the Court again found no substantial evidence to support such claim, for which it rejected such suggestion by remarking–
“The victim in this case without any animosity against the accused has come forward at a risk of his reputation that he was sexually assaulted by the accused. The defence has failed to bring any conjoint reasons for false implication. The victim has narrated in detail where and how the incidents have taken place. He has been thoroughly and fully cross-examined. The victim's testimony is stated to be of sterling quality having a ring of proof around it, enough to build the accused conviction on it. Enmity can have double impact both in support and against the accused. It may add that animosity is double edged sword and if given undue weight may lead to injustice, in view of the un-controverted testimony of the victim boy.”
Therefore, basing upon the consistent testimony of the minor, being duly corroborated by the evidence of his parents, the Court found sufficient force in the prosecution allegations and resultantly, found the accused guilty of committing aggravated penetrative sexual assault on the victim.
The court sentenced the tutor to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 20 (twenty) years, along with fine. Before parting, the Court notably observed –
“The minor boy with efflux of time would grow with traumatic experience, an unforgettable shame. He shall always be haunted by the memory replete with heavy crush of disaster constantly echoing the chill air of the part forcing him to state of nightmarish melancholia. He may not be able to assert the honour of a man for no fault him.”
Case Title: State of Odisha v. Hafiz Nur Artaj @ Akhtar
Case No: Spl. GR Case No. 141 of 2025
Date of Judgment: June 23, 2026
Counsel for the State/Prosecution: Mr. S.N. Das, Special Public Prosecutor
Counsel for the Accused: Mr. K.N. Pattnaik, Advocate & Associates