Safiya Malik

In a recent judgment, the High Court of Kerala upheld the conviction of an individual previously found guilty under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) and Section 376(2)(i) and (n) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The court upheld the conviction but modified the sentence imposed by the trial court. Initially sentenced to twenty years of rigorous imprisonment, the High Court reduced this to ten years, directing that the sentence should run concurrently with the appellant’s previous conviction in another case.

The case arose from allegations against the appellant, who was a pastor at the Salvation Army Church. The victim, a minor girl, lived with her mother and maternal grandparents following the passing of her father. The appellant, in his capacity as a religious leader, was known to the victim and her family, with whom he maintained a close relationship.

The prosecution alleged that the appellant took advantage of this relationship and repeatedly committed sexual assault on the victim between December 2013 and January 2015. The victim disclosed the incidents to her teacher on February 2, 2015, which prompted immediate intervention by the Child Welfare Committee. Based on the victim’s statement, the police registered a case and proceeded with the investigation.

The prosecution relied on multiple pieces of evidence, including:

• The victim’s direct testimony, which was found to be consistent throughout the investigation and trial.

• Statements provided to the police, Child Welfare Committee, and magistrate.

• Medical reports confirming past vaginal penetration.

• Testimony from the victim’s teacher, who first received the disclosure.

• Testimony from the victim’s mother and other corroborative witnesses.

During the trial, the defense raised several objections, including questioning the credibility of the victim’s testimony, stating inconsistencies in her statements, and arguing that the prosecution had failed to establish the victim’s age conclusively. The defense contended that there were no external injuries on the victim and claimed that the accusations were influenced by external factors.

The trial court, after evaluating the evidence, convicted the appellant under Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act and Section 376(2)(i) and (n) of the IPC, imposing a sentence of twenty years of rigorous imprisonment. The appellant subsequently challenged the judgment before the High Court.

The Kerala High Court examined the testimonies and corroborative evidence presented during the trial. The court underscored that a conviction for sexual assault can be sustained solely based on the testimony of the victim, provided it meets a high standard of reliability. The bench stated: “The evidence of a sterling quality is one that appears natural and consistent with the case of the prosecution qua the accused.”

The court found that the victim’s testimony met this standard, as it remained consistent across multiple statements given to the Child Welfare Committee, police, and magistrate. The court also noted that the victim had no motive to falsely implicate the appellant, given her family’s close association with the church and the appellant himself.

The medical examination report corroborated the victim’s claims, as the gynaecologist who examined her found evidence of past vaginal penetration. While no fresh injuries were recorded, the doctor testified that the nature of sexual assault in such cases does not always result in external injuries.

Further corroboration came from the victim’s teacher, who testified that the victim was visibly distressed when she disclosed the abuse. The teacher stated that the victim provided details of inappropriate physical contact, including instances where the appellant allegedly restrained and assaulted her at the church and at her home.

The court also examined the appellant’s contention that the prosecution failed to establish the victim’s exact age, which could impact the applicability of the POCSO Act. While the defense raised concerns over the lack of birth certificate evidence, the court noted that school records indicated the victim was under 18 years old at the time of the offense. The court concluded that even if doubts remained about her exact age, the conviction under Section 376(2)(n) IPC was valid, given that the repeated sexual assault was established beyond reasonable doubt.

Regarding sentencing, the High Court acknowledged that the trial court had imposed the maximum sentence under the applicable provisions. The appellant, however, argued that the sentence was excessive and should be revised, particularly in light of Section 427 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which allows concurrent sentencing in cases of multiple convictions.

While upholding the conviction, the High Court under Section 427 of the CrPC and modified the sentence to ten years of rigorous imprisonment. The court stated: “In as much as it is found that the appropriate punishment to be imposed on the accused for having committed rape on the victim repeatedly is ten years imprisonment, we are of the view that the benefit of Section 427 of the Code ought to be extended to the accused, and the sentences imposed on him shall be ordered to run concurrently.”

Consequently, the sentence in the present case will run concurrently with the sentence in the appellant’s previous conviction in a similar case. The court observed that imposing consecutive sentences totalling twenty years would be disproportionate under the circumstances.

Case Title: Sanil K. James v. State of Kerala

Case Number: CRL.A No. 439 of 2024

Bench: Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar & Justice Jobin Sebastian

[Read/Download order]