Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sunil Uikey vs The State Of M.P. on 7 August, 2025
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal, Avanindra Kumar Singh
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:37124
1 CRA-913-2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH
ON THE 7 th OF AUGUST, 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 913 of 2023
SUNIL UIKEY
Versus
THE STATE OF M.P.
Appearance:
Shri Neeraj Dubey - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Ajay Tamrakar, learned Public Prosecutor for the State.
JUDGEMENT
Per: Justice Vivek Agarwal
This appeal is filed being aggrieved of the judgment dated 3.03.2022
passed by learned Session Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Act, Itarsi, District
Hoshangabad in (POCSO) Session Case No.49/2020, whereby learned trial
Court has convicted the appellant and sentenced him as under :-
Conviction Sentence
Section Act Imprisonment Fine if Imprisonment
deposited in lieu of fine
376(2) IPC Life Rs.1,000/- R.I. for two
(N) Imprisonment months
376(a.b) IPC Life Rs.1,000/- R.I. for two
Imprisonment months
till death
5(L)/6 POCSO Life Rs.1,000/- R.I. for two
imprisonment months
5(M)/6 POCSO Life Rs.1,000/- R.I. for two
imprisonment months
5(N)/6 POCSO Life Rs.1,000/- R.I. for two
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:37124
2 CRA-913-2023
5(N)/6 POCSO Life Rs.1,000/- R.I. for two
imprisonment months
2. It is submitted that appellant being a stepfather of the victim has been
falsely implicated. Victim was not interested in residing with the appellant,
he being stepfather with whom mother of the victim had performed marriage
after leaving her first husband i.e. the biological father of the victim, as a
result of which appellant has been falsely implicated.
3. Shri Neeraj Dubey, learned counsel for the appellant submits that as far
as age of the victim is concerned, that is not proved because in 161 Cr.P.C.
statements mother of the victim stated that victim never attended any school,
but later on, not only Anganwadi Karyakarta was examined, but also the
school teacher, PW-5, was examined, who stated that date of birth of the
victim is 05.01.2010 and she had taken admission in his school on
16.06.2015 vide 'Dakhil Kharij' register Ex.P-8, and birth register of the
school, Ex.P-9.
4. It is pointed out that when mother of the victim states that victim had
never attended any school, then this kind of evidence from the school will be
of no assistance to the prosecution and, accordingly, prosecution having
failed to prove its case, coupled with the fact that DNA report, Ex.P-22, says
that it's a very low uninterpretable and, therefore, testing is not possible, goes
in favour of the appellant and, therefore, a finding of acquittal must be
recorded.
5. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, learned Public Prosecutor for the State, in his turn,
submits that PW-4 is the Lady Doctor, Dr. Vijaya Tikariya. She has though
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:37124
3 CRA-913-2023
stated that there were no signs of struggle, but she has also stated that
menstrual cycle of the victim had not started, as her age was about 12 years.
She also stated that her secondary sexual characters were in a stage of
development and were in accordance with her age. She had found redness on
labia majora and, thereafter stated that hymen was old torn and healed. Thus,
it is submitted that this evidence of PW-4, Lady Doctor coupled with PW-5,
Dharamlal Yadav, and also the fact that victim refused to go in the company
of her father or mother and was kept in a child care home, reveals beyond
reasonable doubt that prosecutrix had no reason to falsely implicate the
appellant and her testimony having been unrebutted rather corroborated with
medical evidence points out towards the guilt of the appellant.
6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the
record. PW-1, victim, categorically stated in para 3 that 'wrong' was
performed on her that is Sunil used to take out her cloths and used to put his
pennis inside her vagina. She also admitted that she was under constant fear
of Sunil i.e. her stepfather and when cousin sister came from Betul, then she
confided in her, who had in turn confided in the Coordinator, PW-2, and
Anganwadi Karyakarta, PW-6, as a result of which report came to be
lodged.
7. In cross-examination, victim has clearly stated that when her privacy
was violated for the first time, she had shouted for help but mother did not
respond as stepfather used to administer sleeping pills to her.
8. PW-2, Smt. Madhu Babariya, Coordinator, Childline, Hoshangabad
stated that sister of the victim stated that not only privacy of the victim was
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:37124
4 CRA-913-2023
being violated by her stepfather but her own privacy was violated by her
Mama (Maternal Uncle) at Betul. When this report was lodged, then rescue
team from Childline, Hoshangabad had reached the place of the incident,
they had talked to the victims, and thereafter, on the next day when they
reached the house of the victim to rescue them, then both the father and
mother of the victim were present. Victim had given her statements before
the Coordinator of Childline and, thereafter case was registered.
9. Though, Shri Neeraj Dubey, learned counsel for the appellant submits
that PW-3, Dr. Ashish Patel, had not found any injury marks on the private
parts of the body of the appellant and stated that there were no signs of
immediate intercourse, but that is inconsequential. In the present case, when
victim herself has stated that her privacy under threat was being violated for
last three to four months and secondly, that her privacy was violated two
days prior to reporting the matter. After three months of the first incident,
not finding any signs of injury on the private parts of the appellant, is not an
unusual circumstance.
10. As far as, PW-4 is concerned, she has though stated that there were no
injury marks but admitted that on the first day of examination victim was not
responding and was suffering from pain. Later on, she was examined, her
slides etc. were prepared, her hymen was old torn and healed, there was no
bleeding at the time of examination and redness can be on account of
intercourse with a minor or on account of infection.
11. PW-5, proved the age of the victim. PW-6, Pramila
Dwivedi, Anganwadi Karyakarta stated that on 19.09.2020, victim and her
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:37124
5 CRA-913-2023
sister had visited Anganwadi Center and they were asking each other to
narrate their woes and when PW-6 and her assistant Nirmala asked them,
then victim had informed her about bad touch given by the appellant and,
then stated that Sunil used to administer alcohol to her mother, as a result of
which she used to go to sleep when Sunil used to violate her privacy. She has
also stated that mother of the victim had come to Anganwadi Center and
wanted to take them but children were reluctant to go with them. Victim had
informed that she had already informed her mother about the acts of her
stepfather, when mother had counselled her to not to defame her father.
12. PW-11, Amrapali Dahat, Sub Inspector, also stated that report was
lodged as per the version of the victim, as contained in Ex.P-15. At the time
of lodging of the report, mother of the victim was also present. Victim was
sent to the hospital after taking consent of the mother through a lady
constable. She has admitted that at the time of the examination there were
problems with the victim and therefore, she was called on the next day of
examination.
13. When all these facts are taken into consideration that victim was a
minor which has been proved by the school teacher, PW-5, corroborated by
lady doctor, PW-4, provisions of POCSO Act will be attracted.
14. As far as, contention of Shri Neeraj Dubey, learned counsel for the
appellant that appellant has been made an escape goat, because victim had
disliking for her stepfather is concerned, that is not made out from the record.
In cross-examination, she stated that Sunil Uikey used to drink alcohol.
There are two rooms in the house. She used to sleep with her mother. On the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:37124
6 CRA-913-2023
date of the incident also, she had slept with mother. At the time of the
incident, her stepfather Sunil had taken her to a different place. It was 01:00
am. She cried for help but her mother did not respond. On her own stated that
father used to administer sleeping pills to her. She also stated that Sunil did
not commit any wrong on her cousin sister but denied a suggestion that she is
having any kind of adversarial opinion about her stepfather. She has also
denied that since she is not interested in staying with her stepfather, she tried
to falsely implicate him. In para 3 of her examination-in-chief, she has
categorically stated the act which will come under the definition of
aggravated penetrative sexual assault, as defined under Section 5(L) and 5
(M), which is medically corroborated by PW-4 though not in very clear
terms but in the form of the physical status of the victim.
15. When these facts are taken into consideration, then there being no
reason to doubt, evidence of the victim, who has in unambiguous terms
stated the act and the atrocities meted by the appellant. We have carefully
scanned the evidence, this witness neither appears to be tutored nor appears
to be under any kind of coercion to maline the appellant. Thus, when the act
is committed which will fall under Section 5(L)/6, 5(M)/6 and 5(N)/6, then
we are of the opinion that merely on some technicalities, conviction of the
appellant under Section 5(L)/6, 5(M)/6 and 5(N)/6 does not call for
interference.
16. Appeal fails and is dismissed. Record of the trial Court be sent back.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:37124
7 CRA-913-2023
(VIVEK AGARWAL) (AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
MTK
