Supreme Court Restores Conviction in POCSO Case, Raps High Court for Misapplying Procedure

Case Name: Sushil Kumar Tiwari vs. Hare Ram Sah & Ors.
Date of Order: 01.09.2025
Citation: SLP (Crl.) No. 18377 of 2024; 2025 INSC 1061
Bench: Justice Sanjay Kumar, Justice Satish Chandra Sharma (DB)

Held: The Supreme Court set aside the acquittal granted by the Patna High Court and restored the conviction of the accused under Section 376(2) IPC and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act. The Court held that the High Court had erred in discarding a consistent and credible prosecution case by overemphasizing minor inconsistencies and procedural lapses, particularly regarding joint trial under Section 223 CrPC and framing of charges. The Court stressed that “procedure is not supposed to control justice” and that the principle of “beyond reasonable doubt” cannot be misapplied to allow actual culprits to escape.

Summary: The case arose from the sexual assault of a 12-year-old girl in Piro, Bihar, in 2016. The trial court convicted the accused Hare Ram Sah and Manish Tiwari under Section 376(2) IPC and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act, sentencing them to rigorous life imprisonment. The Patna High Court, however, acquitted them citing inconsistencies in evidence, defective framing of charges, and violation of Section 223 CrPC (improper joint trial).
On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the testimony of the victim, corroborating medical reports, transfer certificate, and evidence of pregnancy and abortion. It held that the victim’s consistent and natural testimony, supported by medical evidence, sufficiently proved the offences. The Court observed that minor variations in age assessment or inability to recall precise dates did not undermine the prosecution case, especially when intimidation delayed disclosure.
The Supreme Court criticized the High Court for treating procedural lapses as fatal, clarifying that irregularities in charges or joint trials under Section 223 CrPC do not vitiate proceedings unless actual prejudice or failure of justice is shown. The Court also emphasized that acquittals based on “unreasonable doubts” erode public faith in the justice system and harm societal security.

Decision: The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court’s judgment, and restored the trial court’s conviction and sentence of life imprisonment under Section 376(2) IPC and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act. The respondents were directed to surrender within two weeks, failing which the trial court was ordered to secure their custody.