Citation: Suraj Kumar v. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr. 2026:DHC:8506
A criminal appeal filed challenging his conviction and 20-year prison sentence under the POCSO Act and IPC for allegedly sexually assaulting a minor. The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the trial court’s judgment and sentence, and acquitted the appellant, holding that major inconsistencies and contradictions between the testimonies of the victim and her mother, combined with a lack of corroborating medical evidence and a possible underlying financial dispute, created reasonable doubt about the prosecution’s case.
The Delhi High Court (Justice Madhu Jain) allowed Suraj Kumar’s appeal and acquitted him of charges of aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a minor girl (about 10 years old) under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, along with kidnapping, wrongful confinement and house trespass under the IPC. The trial court had convicted him and sentenced him to 20 years’ imprisonment. The High Court found that the case was not proved beyond reasonable doubt: the girl’s courtroom testimony left out key details from her earlier statement (such as the accused opening the gate lock), her mother’s account contradicted hers on how many incidents occurred and where the girl was found, the girl admitted her mother and uncle had told her what to say to the police, there was no medical evidence supporting the allegation, and the prosecution could not explain how the accused got the gate keys. Relying on Supreme Court rulings, the Court held that the POCSO presumptions don’t remove the prosecution’s duty to first prove the basic facts with reliable evidence, so the conviction and sentence were set aside and the appellant was ordered to be released.