'Trial Court Not Considered Any Mitigating Circumstances,' SC Reduces Sentences Under S.6 Of POCSO Act

The Supreme Court has reduced the sentence of two men convicted under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act from life imprisonment till the end of their natural life to 20 years of imprisonment, while upholding their conviction.

A bench comprising Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma observed that although the Special Court did not impose the death penalty, it failed to consider any mitigating circumstances before awarding the maximum sentence of life imprisonment for the remainder of the convicts' natural life, which the High Court subsequently affirmed.

Referring to the punishment prescribed under Section 6 of the POCSO Act for aggravated penetrative sexual assault, the bench noted;

“We find that the minimum punishment delineated under the said Section is twenty years but which may extend to imprisonment for life which shall mean imprisonment for remainder of natural life of the accused and shall be liable to fine or with death.”

The Court reiterated that the statutory minimum punishment under Section 6 is 20 years and highlighted the young age of the appellants at the time of the offence.

“Bearing in mind the fact that the appellants herein were in their early twenties when the incident took place and the fact that now they have completed only five years of incarceration and even for completion of the minimum sentence it would mean another fifteen years, we find that the appellants are now in their mid-twenties and even if the minimum sentence is to be completed they would be in their early forties,” the Court remarked.

The bench concluded that, in the interest of justice, the sentence should be reduced to the statutory minimum.

The appellants, Pintu Thakur alias Ravi and another individual, had challenged the April 26, 2024, judgment of the Chhattisgarh High Court, which upheld their conviction and sentence awarded by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court (POCSO), Ramanujganj, District Balrampur.

Their counsel argued that the conviction itself was erroneous. Alternatively, he submitted that even if the conviction was to stand, the sentence of life imprisonment till the end of their natural life was disproportionate and unduly harsh, considering that the minimum punishment under Section 6 of the POCSO Act is 20 years.

The State opposed any interference, contending that both the conviction and the sentence were in accordance with law and had been rightly upheld by the High Court.

After carefully considering the arguments, the Supreme Court observed;

“We are not inclined to interfere with the judgment of conviction passed by the Special Court and which has been affirmed by the impugned order. However, we have considered the second submission made by the counsel for the appellants which is in light of Section 6 of the POCSO Act.”

Accordingly, the Court allowed the appeals in part, modifying the sentence to 20 years of imprisonment.

Case Title: Pintu Thakur @ Ravi Etc. vs. State of Chhattisgarh