Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Incestuous POCSO Case and Directs Rs.10.5 Lakh Compensation to Victim

A bench of Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Sandeep Mehta heard the Special Leave Petition (Criminal) challenging the judgment of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh which had affirmed the conviction and sentence of the petitioner for offences under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 506 IPC. The petition sought to set aside the concurrent findings of guilt returned by the trial court and affirmed on appeal and also pressed for interim bail.

The Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition in limine, holding that the concurrent findings of the courts below were just, lawful and necessary, and refused to entertain interim bail given the gravity of the offences and the nature of the evidence. The Supreme Court affirmed the life sentence and fine imposed by the lower courts and directed compensation of Rs.10,50,000 to the victim, structuring payment so that Rs.7,00,000 was placed in a five-year fixed deposit and Rs.3,50,000 was paid into the victim’s account. The Court emphasised the protective purpose of the POCSO Act and the need for stern deterrence in cases of familial sexual abuse, stating that "There can be no mitigation in sentencing for crimes that subvert the very notion of family as a space of security." The Court, in its reasoning, observed: "It is now well settled that the testimony of a child victim, if found credible and trustworthy, requires no corroboration. The Courts below have not merely accepted the victim’s account, they have validated it through unimpeachable scientific evidence. The DNA report sealed the evidentiary chain and has dispelled all doubts in the prosecution case which is sought to be assailed by the petitioner." The Court further noted that "justice must not be limited to conviction, it must, where the law so permits, include restitution."

Background The petition arose from convictions for repeated aggravated penetrative sexual assault perpetrated by a father upon his daughter, who was approximately ten years old at the time of the offences. The trial court convicted after evaluating the victim’s testimony (PW3), corroboration by an elder sister (PW2), medical and forensic records including a DNA report; the High Court at Shimla affirmed conviction and life imprisonment with fine. The petitioner urged false implication stemming from domestic discord; the prosecution relied on consistent testimony, scientific corroboration and the statutory presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act. The Supreme Court observed that the victim’s disclosure, though delayed, was attributable to trauma and threats, and that the presumption of guilt under the POCSO framework remained unrebutted.

Relying on settled principles that a credible child witness does not require corroboration and on precedent concerning compensation schemes (including reference to Nipun Saxena v. Union of India and the Compensation Scheme for Women Victims/Survivors of Sexual Assault/Other Crimes, 2018), the Court directed payment and deposit arrangements for compensation, and denied bail in view of concurrent non-perverse findings on guilt. The Special Leave Petition was dismissed in limine and pending applications were disposed of.

Case No.: 2025 INSC 934 (Diary No. 33114/2025) Case Title: Bhanei Prasad @ Raju v. State of Himachal Pradesh Appearances: For the Petitioner(s): Not indicated in the order For the Respondent(s): Not indicated in the order