[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
Sagar Ray vs State Of Uttarakhand on 10 April, 2026
2026:UHC:2616
Judgment Reserved on: 27.02.2026
Judgment Pronounced on: 10.04.2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Criminal Appeal No.391 of 2021
Sagar Ray ......Appellant
Vs.
State of Uttarakhand .....Respondent
Presence: Mr. M.K. Ray, learned counsel for the Appellant.
Mr. Vikas Uniyal, learned Brief Holder for State.
Hon'ble Ashish Naithani, J.
The present Criminal Appeal has been preferred under Section
374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment and order
dated 23.10.2021 passed by the learned Juvenile Justice Court / FTC /
Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge, POCSO, Rudrapur, District
Udham Singh Nagar in Special Sessions Trial No. 621 of 2018, whereby
the Appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section
6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years
along with a fine of Rs. 5,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the
Appellant has been directed to undergo additional simple imprisonment
for one month.
2. The Appellant has further been convicted for the offences
punishable under Sections 363 and 367 of the Indian Penal Code and
sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of 3 years each along
with fine, with default stipulations. All the sentences have been directed to
run concurrently.
3. The case, in brief, is that the victim, who was a minor at the relevant
point of time, was allegedly enticed and taken away by the Appellant from
1
Criminal appeal No. 391 of 2021, Sagar Ray Vs. State of Uttarakhand------
Ashish Naithani J.
2026:UHC:2616
the lawful guardianship of her parents. It is alleged that during the period
of such taking, the Appellant committed aggravated penetrative sexual
assault upon the victim, thereby attracting the rigours of Section 6 of the
POCSO Act.
4. Upon registration of the First Information Report, the matter was
investigated. The victim was medically examined, her statement under
Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded, and upon completion of investigation,
a charge-sheet was submitted against the Appellant.
5. The case being triable by the Special Court under the POCSO Act,
charges were framed against the Appellant under the relevant provisions.
The prosecution, in order to substantiate its case, examined witnesses
including the victim, her guardians, and the investigating officials, and
also relied upon documentary evidence including medical and age-related
records.
6. The Appellant denied the allegations and claimed false implication.
No cogent defence evidence was led, except suggestions in cross-
examination and denial in his statement recorded under Section 313
Cr.P.C.
7. The learned Trial Court, upon appreciation of the evidence on
record, found that the prosecution had succeeded in establishing the guilt
of the Appellant beyond reasonable doubt and accordingly recorded
conviction and imposed sentence as noted above.
8. Learned counsel for the Appellant has assailed the impugned
judgment primarily on the ground that the prosecution has failed to
establish the foundational requirement of minority of the victim in
2
Criminal appeal No. 391 of 2021, Sagar Ray Vs. State of Uttarakhand------
Ashish Naithani J.
2026:UHC:2616
accordance with law. It is submitted that the learned Trial Court has
placed reliance upon school records to determine the age of the victim,
however, the prosecution has not examined the author of such documents
nor has it proved the source from which the date of birth was recorded.
9. According to the learned counsel, in the absence of proof of the
basis of such entries, the documents relied upon cannot be treated as
conclusive proof of age. It is further contended that no medical
examination for determination of age was conducted, and therefore, the
possibility of the victim being a major, or at least being of an age
proximate to majority, has not been ruled out, thereby rendering the
applicability of the provisions of the POCSO Act doubtful.
10. Learned counsel for the Appellant has further submitted that the
testimony of the victim is not of such quality as would inspire confidence
and form the sole basis of conviction. It is contended that there are
material inconsistencies in her statements recorded at different stages of
the proceedings. According to the learned counsel, the version as set out
in the First Information Report does not fully align with the statement
recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., and certain aspects of the allegation
have been improved upon in her deposition before the Court. It is argued
that these discrepancies are not trivial but relate to the core of the
prosecution case, including the manner in which she was allegedly taken
away and the nature of the acts attributed to the Appellant.
11. It is further submitted that the conduct of the Victim, as borne out
from the record, does not support the allegation of forcible taking or
assault. Learned counsel contends that the victim remained in the
company of the Appellant for a considerable duration and did not raise
any alarm or make any attempt to escape, despite having opportunities to
3
Criminal appeal No. 391 of 2021, Sagar Ray Vs. State of Uttarakhand------
Ashish Naithani J.
2026:UHC:2616
do so. It is argued that such conduct creates a serious doubt regarding the
prosecution version and gives rise to a reasonable inference that the victim
may have accompanied the Appellant voluntarily.
12. Learned counsel has also questioned the evidentiary value of the
medical evidence relied upon by the prosecution. It is submitted that the
medical examination does not disclose any injuries suggestive of force or
resistance, nor does it conclusively establish the occurrence of recent
sexual assault.
13. It is also contended that the ingredients of the offence under Section
367 IPC have not been established. Learned counsel submits that there is
no material on record to demonstrate that the Appellant had kidnapped or
abducted the victim with the intention of subjecting her to grievous hurt,
slavery, or unnatural lust, as required under the said provision. It is argued
that the learned Trial Court has not recorded any specific finding in this
regard and has erroneously applied the provision. It is, therefore, prayed
that the impugned judgment and order be set aside and the Appellant be
acquitted.
14. Per contra, learned BRIEF HOLDER appearing for the State has
supported the impugned judgment and submitted that the prosecution has
successfully established the age of the victim through documentary
evidence which has been duly exhibited during trial. It is contended that
the school records relied upon by the prosecution have not been
effectively challenged by the defence and carry a presumption of
correctness. Learned BRIEF HOLDER submits that in the absence of any
cogent rebuttal, the learned Trial Court has rightly accepted the said
evidence to conclude that the victim was a minor at the time of the
incident.
4
Criminal appeal No. 391 of 2021, Sagar Ray Vs. State of Uttarakhand------
Ashish Naithani J.
2026:UHC:2616
15. Learned Brief Holder has further submitted that the testimony of the
victim is clear, consistent on material particulars, and inspires confidence.
It is argued that the core of the prosecution case remains intact throughout
her statements, and any minor variations are natural and do not affect the
credibility of her version. It is further submitted that the prosecutrix has
withstood cross-examination and nothing substantial has been elicited to
discredit her testimony.
16. It is also contended that the argument regarding voluntary
companionship or consent is wholly misconceived in view of the
established minority of the victim. Learned brief holder submits that under
the scheme of the POCSO Act, the consent of a minor is of no legal
consequence, and therefore, even if it is assumed that the victim
accompanied the Appellant willingly, the same would not absolve the
Appellant of criminal liability.
17. Learned brief holder has further submitted that medical evidence in
cases of sexual assault is corroborative in nature and not determinative. It
is argued that absence of injuries or a conclusive medical opinion does not
negate the occurrence of sexual assault, particularly where the testimony
of the victim is otherwise reliable and trustworthy.
18. It is also submitted that the offence under Section 363 IPC stands
clearly established as the victim was taken away from the lawful
guardianship of her parents. Insofar as the offence under Section 367 IPC
is concerned, learned brief holder submits that the circumstances of the
case, including the act of taking the minor away and subjecting her to
sexual assault, justify the application of the said provision.
19. Learned brief holder has thus submitted that the learned Trial Court
has undertaken a proper appreciation of the evidence on record and has
5
Criminal appeal No. 391 of 2021, Sagar Ray Vs. State of Uttarakhand------
Ashish Naithani J.
2026:UHC:2616
recorded well-reasoned findings which do not call for interference in
appellate jurisdiction. It is, therefore, prayed that the appeal be dismissed.
20. Heard learned counsel for the Parties and perused the records.
21. The first and foremost contention raised on behalf of the Appellant
relates to the age of the victim and the applicability of the provisions of
the POCSO Act. It has been argued that the prosecution has failed to
establish the minority of the victim in accordance with law. Upon
consideration of the material available on record, this Court finds that the
learned Trial Court has relied upon documentary evidence, including
school records, to determine the age of the victim. Such documents,
having been exhibited during trial and not effectively discredited in cross-
examination, carry due evidentiary value. It is well-settled that in the
absence of any cogent rebuttal, school records can be relied upon for
determining age. The defence has not led any evidence to controvert the
said documents nor has it been able to demonstrate any inherent
inconsistency therein. In such circumstances, the finding recorded by the
learned Trial Court that the victim was a minor does not suffer from any
illegality or perversity.
22. Once the minority of the victim stands established, the argument
sought to be advanced on behalf of the Appellant regarding consent or
voluntary companionship loses all significance. The scheme of the
POCSO Act is clear and unambiguous in this regard, inasmuch as the
consent of a minor is immaterial in the eyes of law. Therefore, even if the
victim had accompanied the Appellant without resistance, the same would
not dilute the criminal liability arising under the provisions of the Act.
6
Criminal appeal No. 391 of 2021, Sagar Ray Vs. State of Uttarakhand------
Ashish Naithani J.
2026:UHC:2616
23. The next limb of argument relates to the credibility of the testimony
of the victim. It has been contended that her statements suffer from
inconsistencies and improvements. This Court has carefully examined her
testimony as recorded before the learned Trial Court as well as her earlier
statements. It is found that the core of the prosecution case, namely that
the Appellant had taken the victim away and subjected her to sexual
assault, remains consistent throughout. The variations pointed out by the
defence are not of such magnitude as would go to the root of the matter.
Minor discrepancies are but natural in the testimony of a witness,
particularly in cases involving a young victim, and do not render the entire
case doubtful. The testimony of the victim, in the present case, inspires
confidence and does not suffer from any material infirmity so as to
warrant its rejection.
24. The contention regarding the absence of medical corroboration has
also been considered. It is trite that medical evidence is corroborative in
nature and cannot override the direct testimony of the victim if the same is
otherwise reliable. In cases of sexual assault, particularly where the victim
is acquainted with the accused or where the incident does not involve
overt physical violence, absence of injuries is not uncommon. In the
present case, the medical evidence does not contradict the State's version.
Therefore, the absence of conclusive medical findings does not serve to
the benefit of the Appellant.
25. The argument regarding the conduct of the victim has also been
raised, suggesting that her failure to raise alarm or escape indicates
voluntariness. This Court is not persuaded by the said submission. The
conduct of a victim cannot be measured by rigid standards, and different
individuals may react differently to similar situations. The mere fact that
the victim did not raise alarm or attempt escape cannot be construed to
7
Criminal appeal No. 391 of 2021, Sagar Ray Vs. State of Uttarakhand------
Ashish Naithani J.
2026:UHC:2616
mean that the incident did not occur or that she was a consenting party,
particularly when her minority stands established.
26. Insofar as the offence under Section 363 IPC is concerned, the
evidence on record clearly establishes that the victim, being a minor, was
taken away from the lawful guardianship of her parents by the Appellant.
The essential ingredients of the offence thus stand satisfied.
27. With regard to the offence under Section 367 IPC, although the
argument has been raised that the requisite intention has not been
established, this Court finds that the act of taking away a minor and
subjecting her to sexual assault would clearly fall within the ambit of the
provision. The learned Trial Court has, therefore, not erred in recording
conviction under the said section.
28. This Court is conscious of the limited scope of interference in an
appeal against conviction. Unless the findings recorded by the learned
Trial Court are shown to be perverse, contrary to the evidence on record,
or suffering from manifest illegality, the appellate court would be slow to
interfere. In the present case, the learned Trial Court has undertaken a
proper appreciation of the evidence and has recorded findings which are
both reasonable and legally sustainable.
29. Upon an overall consideration of the material on record, this Court
is of the view that the state has succeeded in establishing the guilt of the
Appellant beyond reasonable doubt.
ORDER
30. The appeal is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed.
Criminal appeal No. 391 of 2021, Sagar Ray Vs. State of Uttarakhand------
Ashish Naithani J.
2026:UHC:2616
31. The judgment and order dated 23.10.2021 passed by the learned
Juvenile Justice Court / FTC / Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge,
POCSO, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar in Special Sessions Trial
No. 621 of 2018 is hereby affirmed.
32. The Appellant is stated to be in custody.
(Ashish Naithani J.)
10.04.2026
Arti
Criminal appeal No. 391 of 2021, Sagar Ray Vs. State of Uttarakhand------
Ashish Naithani J.
