The Rajasthan High Court upheld life imprisonment till death for a father convicted of raping his minor daughter, holding that the crime amounted to a complete betrayal of the sacred father-daughter relationship and warranted the strictest punishment under law.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
RAJASTHAN: In a reaffirmation of child protection laws, the Rajasthan High Court has upheld the life imprisonment till death sentence awarded to a man convicted of raping his own minor daughter, observing that the crime reflected a
“complete betrayal of the most sacred and natural relationship between a Father and Daughter.”
The Division Bench comprising Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur and Justice Chandra Shekhar Sharma dismissed the criminal appeal preferred by the appellant Manoj against the judgment dated November 14, 2022, passed by the Special Judge (POCSO Act), Dungarpur.
The appellant was convicted of offences under:
- Section 376(2) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)
- Section 376AB IPC
- Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012
The trial court had sentenced the accused to life imprisonment till death, along with fines under each provision. The High Court found no infirmity or perversity in the findings recorded by the trial court.
Background of the Case
The case originated from a complaint submitted on 17 August 2022 by the victim’s mother at Police Station Vardha, District Dungarpur, Rajasthan. In her complaint, she stated that on 11 August 2022, she had gone to her maternal village to celebrate the festival of Raksha Bandhan, leaving her children at home with her husband, the accused Manoj.
According to the complaint, when the complainant returned home on the evening of 13 August 2022, her eldest daughter, a Class VII student born on 04 December 2010, began crying upon seeing her. On being asked the reason, the child disclosed that on the night of 12 August 2022, at about 10:00 p.m., her father had forcibly removed her clothes, lain on top of her, and raped her.
The victim further revealed that the accused had committed similar sexual assaults on two earlier occasions when her mother was away undergoing a surgical operation. She also stated that the accused had threatened and intimidated her, which prevented her from disclosing the incidents earlier.
Shocked by the disclosure, the complainant initially took the victim to her maternal relatives’ house. Subsequently, on 17 August 2022, the complainant, along with her daughter and brother, approached the police station, leading to the registration of FIR No. 60/2022 for offences under Sections 376(2) and 376AB of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 5(l)(m)(n) / 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
Arguments Before the Court
On behalf of the appellant–accused Manoj, Mr. Amardeep Lamba, learned Amicus Curiae, contended that the prosecution had failed to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. It was argued that the complainant had strained matrimonial relations with the appellant and that the FIR was lodged due to marital discord. The defence also relied upon the Forensic Science Laboratory and DNA reports, submitting that the biological samples did not match the appellant.
Per contra, Mr. Rajesh Bhati, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State opposing the appeal, the State argued that the conviction was based on reliable evidence, particularly the consistent testimony of the minor victim, duly corroborated by medical evidence. It was submitted that the delay in lodging the FIR was satisfactorily explained and that statutory presumptions under the POCSO Act operated against the accused, which remained unrebutted.
Accordingly, the State prayed for dismissal of the appeal and for affirmation of the conviction and sentence awarded by the learned Special Judge (POCSO Act), Dungarpur.
Court’s Analysis and Findings
Victim’s Testimony Found Reliable
The High Court found the testimony of the victim (PW-1) to be natural, cogent, and consistent, observing that despite her tender age, her evidence bore the “stamp of truth.” The Court held that there was no reason for the victim to falsely implicate her own father.
The delay in lodging the FIR was held to be satisfactorily explained, considering the social stigma, fear, and intimidation faced by the minor victim.
Medical and Corroborative Evidence
The Court noted that the medical evidence, including the testimony of PW-9, Dr. Leena Dandore, corroborated the prosecution’s case. The finding of a torn hymen supported the victim’s version of sexual assault.
Statutory Presumption Under POCSO
Relying upon Section 114(a) of the Indian Evidence Act and Section 29 of the POCSO Act, the Court held that once foundational facts are established, a presumption of guilt operates against the accused.
The Bench observed:
“In the present case, the victim is a minor below 12 years of age, and therefore, the question of consent does not arise at all.”
The Court strongly condemned the nature of the crime, stating:
“Where the offender is the father—the very person entrusted as the child’s natural protector—the offence transcends ordinary criminality and assumes an abhorrent and grotesque character.”
The Bench further quoted ancient wisdom:
“Yatra naryastu pujyante ramante tatra devata…”
(Where women are honoured, divinity flourishes.)
Relying on the Supreme Court judgment in Bhanei Prasad @ Raju v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2025 INSC 934), the High Court emphasised that justice must extend beyond punishment to include restitution.
Accordingly, the Court directed the State Government to pay ₹27,00,000 (Rupees Twenty-Seven Lakhs only) as compensation to the survivor.
The Court,
- Criminal Appeal Dismissed
- Life Imprisonment Till Death Upheld
- ₹27 Lakh Compensation Directed
Case Title:
Manoj S/o Shankar v. State Of Rajasthan & Anr.
D.B. Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 41/2023
READ JUDGMENT
