Law Updates - The Legal Chamber

Supreme Court Converts Life Imprisonment to 25 Years in POCSO Matter: Here’s Why the Court Showed Leniency

12Feb

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Converts Life Imprisonment to 25 Years in POCSO Matter: Here’s Why the Court Showed Leniency

The Supreme Court partially allowed the appeal, upholding the conviction under Section 376(3) IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. Exercising its sentencing power, the Court commuted the sentence of life imprisonment until natural death to a fixed term of 25 years of actual imprisonment without the benefit of remission, citing the appellant's age, clean antecedents, and satisfactory jail conduct. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from FIR No. 08/2022, registered on 04.05.2022, against the appellant, Deepankar Tikedar. The allegations pertained to the commission of sexual offences against a minor girl, who was reportedly between 15 to 16 years of age at the time of the incident. The appellant was subsequently tried and convicted by the Trial Court under Section 376(3) of the Indian Pe...

No Medical Injury? No Problem: Supreme Court Explains When Victim’s Word Wins in POCSO Cases

The Supreme Court upheld the appellant's conviction under Sections 9(m) and 10 of the POCSO Act, 2012, for aggravated sexual assault on a child. The Court ruled that cogent ocular evidence from witnesses, including the victim's traumatized behavior, can sustain a conviction even if medical evidence does not show injury or penetration. The sentence was partially modified. Facts Of The Case: On August 15, 2021, the appellant, Dinesh Kumar Jaldhari, returned to the victim's home in Jashpur, Chhattisgarh, with her father and another man after collecting wood. After consuming alcohol, the victim's four-year-old daughter was sleeping inside. Around 4:30 p.m., the mother went inside to give food to the appellant and found him wearing only shorts, sitting near her daughter's legs. Th...

Supreme Court’s Mandate: New Public Notice for Nagaland Village Recognition

The Supreme Court, exercising judicial review over executive decisions, set aside the High Court's directive for village recognition in Nagaland. The Court emphasized adherence to customary laws and specific Office Memorandums requiring "No Objection Certificates" from ancestral villages. It remanded the matter for comprehensive consideration of objections, including those from the appellant, affirming that inter-district boundary disputes are irrelevant to village recognition. Facts Of The Case: This Supreme Court judgment stems from a dispute concerning the recognition of Kakiho Village in Nagaland. The core of the matter involved the application of existing government Office Memorandums (O.M.'s) dated March 22, 1996, and October 1, 2005, which outline criteria for village recognition...