Overview
- Justice Neena Bansal Krishna delivered the January 5 ruling, dismissing the convict’s appeal and upholding a seven-year sentence under Section 10 of the POCSO Act.
- The court held that making a very young child touch an adult’s private parts with sexual intent constitutes aggravated sexual assault.
- Claims of delay in the FIR, alleged tutoring of the child, and challenges to the child’s competency were rejected based on the record of pre-statement assessment and consistent testimony.
- The bench noted that the absence of injury on the child’s genitalia does not undermine the credibility of the survivor or her mother.
- The case involved a tenant who, in June 2022, exposed himself and compelled a girl aged about four to touch him; a trial court convicted him in July 2024 in DHARMENDRA KUMAR v. STATE.