Sandeep Kumar @ Raja @ Vicky vs The State Of Bihar
2025 Latest Caselaw 4709 Patna

Patna High Court

Sandeep Kumar @ Raja @ Vicky vs The State Of Bihar on 12 December, 2025

Author: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad

Bench: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                    CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No.106 of 2023

       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2020 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Rohtas
======================================================
Sandeep Kumar @ Raja @ Vicky S/o Nand Kishore Verma Resident of
Village- New Area Near Lucky House Station Road, Ward No.- 18, Dehri-on-
Sone, P.S.- Dehri, District- Rohtas.


                                                                     ... ... Appellant/s
                                         Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. X


                                                                  ... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s       :        Mr. B.N. Mishra, Advocate
                                   Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, Advocate
For the State             :        Mr. Manish Kumar No. 2, APP
For the Informant         :        Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
             and
             HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
CAV JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY)
Date : 12-12-2025


                Heard Mr. B.N. Mishra assisted by Mr. Umeshanand

 Pandit, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Abhimanyu

 Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and

 Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the informant.
 Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025
                                           2/25




                      2. The present appeal arises out of the judgment of

         conviction dated 21.11.2022 (hereinafter referred to as the

         'impugned judgment') and the order of sentence dated

         23.11.2022

(in short referred to as the 'impugned order') passed

by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 6th -cum-Special

Judge, POCSO, Rohtas at Sasaram in connection with POCSO

Case No. 14 of 2021, arising out of Dehri Mahila P.S. Case No.

58 of 2020.

3. By the impugned judgment, the appellant namely

Sandeep Kumar @ Raja @ Vicky has been convicted for the

offences under Sections 376(D.A.) and 342 of the Indian Penal

Code (in short referred to as the 'IPC') and has been sentenced

to undergo imprisonment for life, to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/-

(Fifty Thousand) and in default of payment of fine to further

undergo Simple imprisonment for a period of three months for

the offence under Section 376(D.A.) of the IPC and to undergo

Simple imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section

342 of the IPC. Both the sentences were directed to run

concurrently.

Prosecution Case:

4. The prosecution case is based on the written

application dated 26.12.2020 submitted by the informant (P.W. Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025

1). In her report, she has stated that on 23.12.2020 at about 7:00

P.M., she and her sister had gone to the shop of Om Prakash @

Tuna to purchase domestic goods. The accused persons--Sahib,

Vicky (the appellant), and Sonu--who were residing in a rented

house at Station Road, Ward No. 17, Durga Gali, Bhayankar

More, P.S. Dehri, allegedly intercepted them at a lonely place,

chased them, caught hold of the informant's sister and forcibly

confined both sisters in the house of Tuna, where they

committed rape upon the victim/informant. When she became

senseless, the accused left her on the street. It is further alleged

that when the victim developed severe abdominal and vaginal

pain and began vomiting blood, her sister disclosed the incident

to their father. The accused persons had also threatened her

sister, warning that if the matter was disclosed, they would kill

both sisters and ruin their father financially.

5. On the basis of the aforesaid written application,

Dehri (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 58 of 2020 dated 26.12.2020

under Sections 506/376(D.A.) of the IPC and Sections 4(2)/6 of

the POCSO Act was registered.

6. After completion of investigation, the Investigating

Officer (I.O.) (P.W. 6) submitted charge-sheet being Charge-

Sheet No. 08 of 2021 dated 26.02.2021 under Sections 342, 376 Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025

(D.A.) and 506 of the IPC and Sections 4(2)/6 of the POCSO

Act.

7. On the basis of the police report, cognizance was

taken vide order dated 03.03.2021 under Sections 342, 376

(D.A.) and 506 of the IPC and Sections 4(2)/6 of the POCSO

Act against the accused/appellant Sandeep Kumar @ Raja @

Vicky.

8. Charges were read over and explained to the

appellant Sandeep Kumar @ Raja @ Vicky in Hindi to which he

pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

9. In course of trial, the prosecution has examined as

many as seven witnesses and exhibited several documents to

prove the prosecution case.

List of Prosecution Witnesses:

P.W. 1 Informant P.W. 2 Informant's sister P.W. 3 Munna Prasad P.W. 4 Mamta Devi P.W. 5 Kamini Kuwar P.W. 6 Ananta Kumari (I.O.) P.W. 7 Dr. Kanchan Singh

List of Exhibits on behalf of the Prosecution:

Ext. 1 Signature of the victim on 164 Cr.P.C. Ext. 2 Signature of the victim on the typed copy of the written application Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025

Ext. 3 Signature of the I.O. on the typed copy of the written application Ext. 4 Signature of the Doctor on the Medico Legal Examination

List of Court Witnesses:

                         C.W. 1         Kumar Bikarmaditya
                         C.W. 2         Ashu Kumar Jha

                          List of Exhibits on behalf of the Court
                 Witnesses:

                       Ext. C-1       Signature of the        Principal     on
                                      Admission Register

                                      in Page 88 of the Admission Register
                       Ext. C-3       Signature of the Principal on the final
                                      entry of the admission register
                       Ext. C-4       Letter No. 951 of the Director,
                                      Forensic    Science  Laboratory,
                                      Government of Bihar
                       Ext. C-5       F.S.L. No.         175/2021         dated
                                      30.03.2022 (nine pages)
                       Ext. C-6       F.S.L. No.         175/2021         dated
                                      09.03.2022 (four pages)
                       Ext. C-7       F.S.L. No.         175/2021         dated
                                      20.07.2021 (two pages)
                       Ext. C-8       Memorandum No. 33/2021 dated
                                      21.01.2021 Forwarding of sending the
                                      exhibits.

10. The accused/appellant was examined under

Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on 27.01.2022,

wherein he has stated that all the allegations are false and that he

is innocent.

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025

Findings of the Learned Trial Court:

11. The learned Trial Court first of all decided the

issue as to whether the victim was a minor or not? It has gone

into recording the fact that the age of the victim was entered as

16 years in the F.I.R. and then 15 years during her statement

under Section 164 Cr.P.C and at the time of her deposition in the

trial, she stated her age to be 18 years. Considering the evidence

of C.W.-1, namely, Kumar Bikramaditya, who was the clerk at

Girls High School, Dalmianagar and who had proved the entries

in the admission register, which has been marked as Exhibit- C-

1 and wherein the age of the victim was entered as 01.01.2005

and, therefore, it was held that on the date of occurrence the

victim was 15 years 11 months 22 days old, which proves the

fact that she was a minor. The learned Trial Court has also

observed that during the trial the defence had not questioned the

fact that the victim was a minor.

12. The learned Trial Court, while discussing the

deposition of the prosecution witnesses, has taken note of the

fact that P.W.-2, the younger sister of the victim was an

eyewitness, as she was accompanying her sister (victim-P.W.-1)

during the occurrence. It has also been observed that the victim

was also examined as P.W.-1 and she had supported the entire Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025

prosecution case and had reiterated what she had written in the

written report given to the police. The learned Trial Court has

held the evidence of P.W.-2, the younger sister of the victim to

be supporting the prosecution case despite the fact that she was

declared hostile as far as the identification of the accused was

concerned. The learned Trial Court, thus, after discussing the

deposition of all the witnesses, held that all the prosecution

witnesses have supported the prosecution case and the Doctor,

I.O and the witness from the Forensic Science Laboratory (in

short, FSL), Patna, have corroborated their statements. The

learned Trial Court has also taken note of the fact that defence

has not been able to prove that he was falsely implicated in the

present case and even during the cross-examination, nothing

could be elicited from the witnesses that could prove to be

contrary statements to the prosecution case and therefore, their

claim of false implication could not be proved and the evidence

of the witnesses was found to be natural and convincing.

13. The learned Trial Court, on the point of non-

observance of the procedures in preparing the DNA profile, has

categorically held that the samples were collected by the I.O.

and were sent to the FSL, Patna and there was no irregularity

committed by the prosecution. It has been held that if the Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025

samples were not collected in accordance with the rules, the

DNA profile would not have given a positive result and

therefore, such contention of the defence was not tenable.

14. The learned Trial Court, taking into account the

medico-legal examination (Exhibit-4) and the FSL report, held

that the prosecution has been able to prove the case under

Section 376 beyond all reasonable doubt. The learned Trial

Court has gone on to hold that all three persons had committed

rape upon the victim and therefore the charge under Section

376(DA) was proved. The learned Trial Court also held that the

victim and her younger sister were kept in wrongful

confinement, which can be proved by the evidence of P.W.-1

and 2 and therefore the charge under Section 342 was found to

be proved, however, the charge under Section 323 of the I.P.C.

was found to be not proved.

Submissions on behalf of the appellant

15. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

appellant has submitted that the judgment of conviction and

order of sentence has been passed more on presumption than on

the materials on record. It has been argued that there was an

unexplained delay of three days in lodging the First Information

Report, which itself casts serious doubt on the veracity of the Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025

prosecution case. The victim's statement under Section 164

Cr.P.C was materially different from her deposition and was

admittedly tutored by the Investigating Officer, thereby vitiating

its credibility. Thus, in absence of direct, reliable or

corroborative evidence, convicting the appellant under Section

376(DA) was wholly unsustainable.

16. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that

the charge under Section 376(DA) cannot be sustained because

the learned Trial Court itself acquitted the other accused persons

while convicting only the appellant, which negates the very

foundation of gang rape under the statutory provision. It has

further been submitted that there exist vital contradictions and

material improvements in the statements of the victim and her

younger sister (PW-2), who was projected as an eyewitness. The

victim (PW-1) failed to identify the appellant and the co-

accused in the dock. Similarly, PW-2 failed to identify any

accused person, resiled from her earlier statement, and was

declared hostile on the point of identification. Even the place of

occurrence stands disputed, as initially it was stated to be the

house of Om Prakash @ Tuna, but later shifted to an adjacent

house. The mother of the victim (PW-4) also refused to identify

the accused, and PW-5, Kamini Kuwar, was declared hostile, Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025

while two additional prosecution witnesses were declared

hostile under Section 154 of the Evidence Act at the instance of

the prosecution itself.

17. The learned counsel for the appellant has drawn

the attention of the Court to the medical report of the victim,

wherein no abnormal stains, foreign particles, or injuries were

found on any part of her body, including her private part. It has

been submitted that this medical evidence completely fails to

corroborate the alleged occurrence and strongly suggests that no

such incident took place. It is argued that if three persons had

indeed committed rape upon the victim, some form of injury,

laceration, abrasion or even tenderness would ordinarily be

expected, and the total absence of such findings destroys the

prosecution case.

18. The learned counsel for the appellant has also

submitted that the Investigating Officer did not collect the

biological samples properly, that they were sent for chemical

examination at a belated stage, and that mandatory procedural

safeguards for scientific examination were not followed. The

forensic expert failed to establish the unbroken chain of custody

of the samples, to explain the delay in their collection and

analysis, or to clarify how such delay may affect the reliability Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025

of DNA profiling. It has been submitted that the DNA report,

which constitutes opinion evidence under Section 39 of the

Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, cannot form the sole basis

of conviction in the absence of corroborative ocular or

circumstantial evidence, particularly when the key witnesses

have turned hostile or have given materially inconsistent

versions. With respect to age determination, it has been

submitted that the prosecution failed to prove the victim's age in

accordance with Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, as

the admission register relied upon relates only to the years

2020-2021 and is not the register of the first school attended by

the victim.

19. Thus, it has been submitted that convicting the

appellant in the present facts and circumstances, without

assigning any motive and without any cogent, reliable or legally

admissible evidence, would be wholly improper. In view of the

contradictions, hostile witnesses, lack of medical or ocular

corroboration, non-compliance with forensic protocols, and

failure to prove age, the impugned judgment and order of

conviction are fit to be set aside.

Submissions on behalf of the informant

20. Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025

informant submits that the evidences of the prosecution

witnesses were consistent on the point of place of occurrence,

the time of occurrence and the manner of occurrence. It has

been submitted that if the evidence of the victim is found to be

convincing and unblemished and of sterling quality, there is no

reason to disbelieve her evidence and conviction can be based

solely on the evidence of the victim as has been held by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in catena of judgments. Learned

counsel has relied upon Rai Sandeep @ Deepu Vs. State of

NCT of Delhi, reported in (2012) 8 SCC 21.

21. The learned counsel for the informant further

submitted that the witnesses, though they have refused to

identify the accused persons, however, there is enough evidence

on record that points towards the guilt of the appellant and it is

only because of some influence of the appellant and others that

they did not identify them at the relevant time during the course

of the trial. It has been pointed out that in the 164 statement of

the victim as well as in the F.I.R., the names have been

categorically given and therefore non-identification of the

appellant or other accused persons will not draw adverse

interference against the victim.

22. The learned counsel for the informant has also Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025

pointed out that the FSL team, which had visited the place of

occurrence, had collected evidence, which were marked as A, B,

and C, respectively and were sent for chemical examination at

the FSL, Patna, wherein the DNA of the appellant had matched

with that of the semen, which was found on the clothes

recovered from the place of occurrence. Thus, it has been

submitted that there is enough evidence on record to hold the

appellant guilty of the charges and therefore there is no illegality

in the judgment and order impugned and the appeal is fit to be

dismissed.

Submissions on behalf of the State

23. Mr Manish Kumar No. 2, learned Additional

Public Prosecutor for the State has supported the arguments

forwarded by the learned counsel for the informant and has

further added that the statement of the victim has stood the test

during the cross-examination and if her statements in the written

report, 164 Cr.P.C statement and thereafter during trial is taken

in totality it would be evident that the same is unimpeachable

and therefore conviction can be sustained on her evidence alone.

It has further been submitted by the learned Addl. P.P. that P.W.-

2, the younger sister of the victim (P.W.-1) was all along present

with the victim and she had initially during investigation Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025

identified all the three accused persons, however, on account of

threat she has not identified the accused persons during trial and

was therefore declared hostile on the point of identification. It

has further been submitted that all the charge-sheet witnesses

have been examined during trial and they have all supported the

factum of the prosecution case and therefore the evidence of the

prosecution witnesses coupled with the fact that the FSL report

has found the blood samples of the appellant matching with the

semen found on the clothes collected from the place of

occurrence, there is no iota of doubt that the appellant was one

of the persons who had committed rape with the victim,

however, as the medical evidence did not support the fact that

the other two persons had also been involved they have been

acquitted by the learned Trial Court.

Consideration

24. We have heard the learned counsel for the

appellant, learned counsel for the informant and learned

Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and also perused the

Trial Court's records.

25. In this case, the victim has been examined as

P.W.-1, who was initially tested by the Court with regard to her

capability to depose being a child, she was present along with Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025

her mother and it has been noted that the victim was not able to

reveal the name of her school or the present address of her

house.

26. P.W.-1, the victim in her deposition has stated that

three boys caught hold of her by her hand and took her to a dark

house and committed wrong with her. She further stated that

they left her behind and thereafter, she went back along with her

sister, who was kept in the courtyard. To a question as to whose

house was it, she has stated that the house belonged to one Om

Prakash @ Tunna and there was one boy who was there prior to

her arrival. The victim has denied the suggestion that she had

stated before the Magistrate that she had gone to the market

along with her sister on 22.03.2020 where she was initially

teased by one of the boys upon which she started running and

then the three boys namely Sandeep Kumar @ Raja @ Vicky

(appellant), Sahil and Raju caught hold of her and took her into

a house and removed her clothes, committed wrong with her

and left her outside her house. The victim was shown the three

accused persons through video conferencing, however, she did

not recognize them. During her cross-examination the victim

has accepted that the statement which she gave before the

Magistrate, what was tutored to her by the I.O (darogaji). In Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025

comparison to her deposition, we take note of the statement

made by the victim in the written report submitted to the Mahila

Police Station, Dehri, wherein she has stated that while she was

going to the shop of Om Prakash @ Tunna on 22.03.2020 at

around 7:00 P.M., three named accused persons started chasing

her with wrong intention at an isolated place and caught hold of

her sister's hand and kept her confined in the shop of Om

Prakash @ Tunna while all the three accused persons took her to

the house of Om Prakash @ Tunna where the three accused

persons took turn in committing rape upon her after which she

fell unconscious and was reeling in pain. She has further stated

that around 09:00 P.M., the accused persons brought her to the

by-lane of her house and left her there in an unconscious

position and she anyhow managed to reach her home, however,

she did not disclose about the incident to her parents and when

she was having pain in her stomach and around her private parts

it was then that her sister has disclosed the entire incident to her

father. She has further stated that the three accused persons have

criminal background and they had threatened her sister that she

would be done to death if they would disclose the incident to

their parents.

27. The statement of the victim was recorded under Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025

Section 164 Cr.P.C by a learned Magistrate on 27.12.2020,

wherein she had disclosed about the incident stating therein that

she had gone to the market alongwith her sister and there three

accused persons chased her and they took her to a house and

closed the doors and all the three accused persons took turn to

commit wrong with her and left her later. She has further stated

that she came back to her house and disclosed about the incident

to her mother and father.

28. On perusal of the three statements of the victim,

one thing which is common is the fact that she had gone to the

market along with her sister on the fateful day i.e. 23.12.2020 at

07:00 P.M and she has categorically named the three persons to

be there at the place of occurrence and having committed

gangrape upon her and therefore leaving her near her house at

around 09:00 P.M. There might have been some minor

discrepancies in her statements, within a span of nine months

from the date of incident. We have already seen that the victim

has been stated to be a minor and she had answered the

questions put to her in a very competent manner, however, the

only issue was with regard to the identification of the accused

persons, including the appellant. This sudden change in non-

identification of the accused persons coupled with the fact that Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025

her younger sister, who had accompanied her on the fateful day

being declared hostile on the point of identification goes to

show that the witnesses were under some influence, which has

made them to say that they did not identify the accused.

29. Though, the younger sister of the victim, who was

examined as P.W.-2, was declared hostile on the point of

identification, however, if her said statements are taken into

account, the factum of the incident happening with them could

not be denied as she has very categorically, during her

examination-in-chief, has stated that she had gone to the market

along with her sister to buy chart-paper wherein the three

accused persons had forcefully taken away her sister (P.W.-2)

and while she was confined in the courtyard, her sister was

taken into room. She has further stated that her sister was kept

in the room for one hour and thereafter, they had gone to their

home. She has also stated that she had disclosed about the

incident to her mother and her sister had also disclosed that

wrong act was committed with her sister/victim.

30. The fact that the victim was hesitant in disclosing

the occurrence is evident from the statement of the father of the

victim, who was examined as P.W.-3, he has stated that his

daughter came back at 09:00 P.M and she was very scared and Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025

she had the apprehension that her father would beat her. He has

stated that the victim disclosed to her mother that wrong was

committed to her by three boys in a room near a grocery

(kirana) shop. During cross-examination, the P.W.-3 (father of

the victim) in paragraph no. 7 has stated that he does not know

who were the boys who had committed wrong with her

daughter.

31. The change in the stand of the prosecution side to

that extent on the point of identification is further evident from

the deposition of P.W.-4, the mother of the victim, who during

her examination-in-chief has stated that her daughter had

disclosed that three boys had committed wrong with her and the

F.I.R. was lodged as per her version. However, her mother has

stated that she does not recognize the boys whose name her

daughter had taken. During her cross-examination she has stated

that till date she does not know as to who were the boys who

had committed wrong with her daughter.

32. From perusal of the statement of the mother of the

victim, it would be evident that she was told about the names of

the boys who had committed wrong with the victim. Her

statement in paragraph No. 6 of her deposition is reproduced

hereunder:

'लडकी ने जजन लोगो का नाम बताया था उनलोगो Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025

को नहीं पहचानती हँ ।ू '

33. From perusal of such statements, it is very much

clear that the prosecution side was in some kind of pressure,

where they have not identified the accused persons, however,

one could not turn a blind eye towards the statements made by

the victim not only in the written report but also in her statement

under Section 164 Cr.P.C as well as in her deposition during

trial.

34. P.W.-6, the I.O of the case has proved the place of

occurrence and he was shown the house of one Vishnu Prasad

where the said incident is said to have taken place in one of the

rooms of the said house. He has stated that the said room was

sealed by the order of the superior authority in order to enable

the FSL team to examine the same.

35. P.W.-7, Kanchan Singh, the doctor who had

examined the victim on 25.12.2020 and has opined as under:-

Details of Examination

On Examination- On clinical examination there was no any abnormal stain, foreign particle or any injury on any of her body parts including her private part. Hymen raptured. Old clotted blood seen around the vaginal in introitus.

(emphasis supplied) Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025

36. During her cross-examination, the doctor (P.W.-7)

has stated that there was no sign of vaginal part and according to

the medical examination sexual intercourse was there.

37. From the deposition of the doctor, it would be

evident that the medical examination proved the fact of sexual

intercourse with the victim and from perusal of the medico-legal

examination of sexual violence, which was part of the record,

we have observed that the Doctor has opined that the hymen

was ruptured and there was afresh tear and old clotted blood

were present near introitus.

38. In addition to the aforesaid findings of the Doctor

(P.W.-7), the FSL report and the DNA report was brought on

record and was made exhibits. Exhibit-C-5 was the DNA test

report and in the conclusion part it has been observed thus:

"The DNA test performed of the exhibits noted above it is sufficient to conclude that :

1. The genetic profile generated from the source of exhibit marked-G/2 (Source-Semen stained cloth cuttings) matches with the genetic profile generated from the source of exhibit marked-D (Source-Blood sample of Sandeep Kumar).

2. The genetic profile generated from the source of exhibit marked-G/2 (Source-Semen stained cloth cuttings) does not match with the genetic profile generated from the source of exhibit marked-F (Source-Blood sample of Anurodh Kumar) and exhibit marked-E (Source-Blood sample of Saheb mishra)."

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025

39. We have noted that the collection of semen stained

cloth, which is said to have been collected from the place of

occurrence, was made by the FSL team and was marked as 'A'.

We verified the records and found that the same was forwarded

by the S.H.O of Mahila Police Station, Dehri, Rohtas vide

memo no.33121 dated 21.01.2021 (Exhibit-C-8).

40. We have perused the FSL, Patna's examination of

crime scene document, wherein the said sample is said to have

been collected from the house where the occurrence had taken

place i.e. the house at ward no. 15 near Durga Mandir gali,

which is shown to be next to the house of Om Prakash @

Tunna.

41. In view of such unimpeachable evidence of the

semen on the stained clothes recovered from the house i.e., the

place of occurrence matching with the blood group of the

appellant, it leaves no doubt about the factum of occurrence and

the appellant being the perpetrator of the crime.

42. As far as the age of the victim is concerned, we

have observed that nothing has been elicited by the defence

from the cross-examination with respect to the age of the victim

and no question were put, challenging her age and therefore, we

have no hesitation in accepting the age which has been disclosed Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025

in the F.I.R by the victim herself and also recorded during her

164 Cr.P.C statement before the Magistrate.

43. We have noticed from the impugned judgment that

the learned trial court in paragraph 24, while considering the

charge under Section 342 IPC (wrongful confinement) has gone

on to hold that from the evidences on record, the accused

persons had wrongfully confined the victim from fleeing. The

learned trial court further held that the charge under Section 342

IPC is proved against the accused persons. Since other accused

persons are not before us, we are not going into this issue in the

present appeal.

44. The learned counsel for the appellant has relied

upon a few judgments rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court

in support of his arguments with regard to the DNA matching.

The judgments are as under:

(i) Manoj v. State of M.P., (2023) 2 SCC 353;

(ii) Pattu Rajan v. State of T.N., (2019) 4 SCC 771;

(iii) Ranjitsing Brahmajeetsing Sharma v. State of

Maharashtra, (2005) 5 SCC 294.

45. We have perused the said judgments and have

found that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has contended that DNA

may be useful for purpose of investigation but not for reasoning Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025

in presumption of identify in a Court of law. The said judgments

have come to a finding that the DNA tests cannot be the sole

criteria for coming to a conclusion with the identity of the

accused. The said legal proposition is well settled, however, in

the present case, we have already observed hereinabove that the

statement of the victim has been consistent as far as the place of

occurrence to the date and time of occurrence and with regard to

the names of the accused persons, however, only when it was a

case of identifying the said accused she failed to do so. We have

also observed that it was on account of some undue influence

that the entire family including the victim had not identified the

accused persons, which was strange especially when the victim

had named the accused persons not only in the F.I.R but also in

her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C and then during her

examination-in-chief in course of the trial.

46. Therefore, the DNA sampling and the matching of

the report by which the semen on the stained cloth had matched

with that of the blood of the appellant is not the only evidence

pointing towards the guilt of the appellant but the initial version

of the prosecution case points towards the involvement of the

appellant.

47. In view of the discussions made hereinabove, we Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.106 of 2023 dt.12-12-2025

are of the considered opinion that the prosecution has been able

to prove the factum of the occurrence and there is no major

contradictions in the version of the victim. The victim is a

wholly reliable witness, her evidence is of sterling quality. We

are convinced that there is no illegality in the findings arrived at

by the learned trial court in convicting the appellant for the

offences under Sections 376 (DA), 342 of the I.P.C and under

Section 6, 5(a) of the POCSO Act.

48. We find no reason to interfere with the judgment

of the learned Trial Court and dismiss the same.

49. Let the Trial Court records along with a copy of

this judgment be sent down to the concerned Trial Court.

(Sourendra Pandey, J)

I agree.

Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J:

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) aditya/-

AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                01.12.2025
Uploading Date          12.12.2025
Transmission Date       12.12.2025