Anuj @ Ambuz @ Chhavinder Kumar vs State Nct Of Delhi

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Reserved on: 28.10.2026
Date of Decision: 05.11.2026
Uploaded on: 05.11.2026
# CNR No. DLHC010575282023
+ CRL.A. 5/2024
ANUJ @ AMBUZ @ CHHAVINDER KUMAR .....Appellant
Through: Mr. Satyam Thareja (DHCLSC), Ms.
Ashu Jain, Mr. Vishwas Chawla,
Advs.
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Raghuvinder Verma, APP for the
State.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MADHU JAIN
JUDGMENT
MADHU JAIN, J.
1. The present criminal appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) of
the Code of Criminial Procedure, 1973, (hereinafter referred to as
‘Cr.P.C.’), assailing the judgment dated 10.08.2023 and the order on
sentence dated 10.10.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge-01 (POCSO), North West, Rohini District Courts, Delhi, in FIR No.
114/2018 , registered at P.S. Mangolpuri under Sections 354, and 506 of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860, (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”), and under
Section 10 of the Protection of Children form Sexual Offences Act, 2012,
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:05.11.2026
19:40:11
CRL.A. 5/2024 Page 1 of 22

(hereinafter referred to as ‘ POCSO Act’ ) whereby the appellant was
convicted for offence u/s 10 of the POCSO act and acquitted for offence u/s
506 of the IPC.
THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE, AS EMERGING FROM THE
IMPUGNED ORDER, ARE AS FOLLOWS:
2. In brief, the case of the prosecution is that on 14.02.2018 at about
1:45 pm, on the way in a van, near Khatta, Q-Block, Mangol Puri, Delhi,
within the jurisdiction of PS Mangol Puri, the accused being the van driver
of the child victim ‘D’ (identity withheld), a minor girl aged about 10 year,
committed aggravated sexual assault upon her, by making her to
touch/press his penis and thereafter criminally intimidated her to kill her in
case she disclosed about the incident to her family members. Pursuant to
receiving of DD No. 20A, ASI Satish, PW-5, rushed to the spot,
apprehended the accused, and thereafter, FIR No. 114/2018 , was registered
on 14.02.2018 at P.S. Mangolpuri for offences under Sections 354, and 506
of the IPC and under Section 10 of the POCSO Act.
3. On 27.09.2018, formal charge for the commission of offences under
506 of the IPC and under Section 10 of the POCSO Act, were framed
against the accused namely Anuj @Amnbuz @Chhavinder Kumar to which
he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. During admission/denial under
Section 294 Cr.P.C. the accused admitted the opinion on his MLC Ex.
PX1/1, the recording of proceedings u/s 164 Cr.P.C. recorded by Learned
MM Ex. PX1/2.
4. To prove its case against the accused and discharge its burden, the
prosecution examined eight witnesses before the learned Trial Court, whose
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:05.11.2026
19:40:11
CRL.A. 5/2024 Page 2 of 22

testimonies have been discussed in the impugned judgment as under:
“ 4 . PW-1/ victim child “D” deposed that she is
studying in school (name and address of school
withheld) and used to go to her school by van driven
by accused. Anuj bhaiya at the time of incident. She
was in class-V at the time of incident. On 14.02.2018
at about 2.00 p.m. when they were coming back from
her school in the van and when the van reached near
Kali Mata Mandir, the van driver bhaiya Anuj told
her that he will tell her how to change the gears.
Then he put his hand on his pant at “shu shu wali
jagah” and asked her to press his penis (shu shu) as
one presses the gear. Thereafter, he threatened her
not to tell it to anyone or else he will kill her. After
reaching home, she informed her mother about the
incident on which she got angry and called the
principal of her school on phone. After some time,
accused Anuj bhaiya came to their house and his
mother slapped him. Her mother called the police
who, came and they all went to police station.
Accused was also brought to police station
separately by the police. Her statement u/s164
Cr.PC was recorded Ex.PW1/A by Ld. MM. She
correctly identified the accused on LCD screen. She
told about the place of incident to the police.
5. PW-2 Principal from the school attended by the
child produced the admission form Ex. PW2/A,
MCD birth certificate Ex. PW2/B, caste certificate
Ex. PW2/C and affidavit of father of the child Ex.
PW2/D, wherein the date of birth is 13.01.2008. The
photocopy of the relevant entry of the admission
register as Ex. PW2/E. She proved certificate Ex.
PX11/F.
6. PW-3 S mother of the victim deposed that victim
child D is her first born child. At the time of incident,
victim was studying in school which was far away
from her house and hence she was advised by the
Principal to hire a cab which will be arranged by
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:05.11.2026
19:40:11
CRL.A. 5/2024 Page 3 of 22

the school. She correctly identified the accused in
the Court as the cab driver of her daughter. PW3
stated that her daughter was the last child to be
dropped by the accused van driver. On 14.02.2018
at about 2.00 p.m., accused dropped her daughter
outside the gali. She saw that her daughter was
weeping while coming. On inquiry, she told her that
today accused misbehaved with her (aaj bhaiya ne
mere saath badtamiji ki). She further asked her to
explain what misbehaviour (badtamiji) was done by
the accused then she told her that when all the
children were dropped and accused was bringing
her back to home, on the way near Q-Block when
they reached near public dustbin(khatta), accused
Anuj asked the victim child to teach how to put gear
in the gear and he suddenly dragged her towards
him and put her hand on his private part.
Thereafter, he put his hand on her hand and started
pressing it. Her daughter further told her that
accused threatened her not to disclose about this to
anyone otherwise she will be killed. She immediately
called her husband at Noida who advised her to call
the Principal and thereafter to the police.
Accordingly, she called the Principal and within 10-
15 minutes, accused came to her house and started
saying that he is innocent and victim was telling a
lie. She slapped him, apprehended him and called
the police at 100 number. Police came to her house
and took the accused along with them. Police asked
her to reach the police station with her daughter.
She reached there where Principal of the school was
also called. In the police station, she gave written
complaint Ex.PW3/A. She refused for any medical
examination of her victim daughter as it was not
required. The school van of her daughter was also
taken into possession by the police in her presence
vide seizure memo Ex.PW3/B. Accused was arrested
vide memo Ex.PW3/C. On 15.02.2018, police
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:05.11.2026
19:40:11
CRL.A. 5/2024 Page 4 of 22

brought her daughter to the Court where her
statement was recorded by Ld. MM. Police took her
and her daughter at Avantika where her daughter
was counseled.
7. PW-4 ASI Usha deposed that on 14.02.2018, at
about 2.05 p.m. wireless operator arrived at the DO
Room and handed over a tehrir to her, on the basis
of which she registered FIR Ex.PW4/A with
endorsement on the original tehrir Ex.PW4/B and
issued a certificate u/s 65B of Indian Evidence Act
Ex.PW4/C.
8. PW-5 ASI Satish deposed that on 14.02.2018, DD
no. 20A dated 14.02.2018 at 2.05 p.m. was marked
to him to which he immediately rushed to the spot.
On reaching the spot, he found that the victim child
“D” and accused, who were taken by the PCR Van
to the police station where IO SI Sangeeta was
recording the statements of mother of the victim.
9. PW-6 HC Naveen Kumar deposed that on
14.02.2018, on receiving DD No. 20A, he
accompanied ASI Satish Chandra to the spot where
they came to know that accused, being the van
driver of the school girl / victim child “D”, had
misbehaved with her. He reiterated the version of
PW6. Duty officer handed over copy of FIR and
original Tehrir of the present case to him and he had
handed over the same to IO/SI Sangeeta.
10. PW-7 HC Jitender deposed that on 14.02.2018,
he joined investigation along with IO/ SI Sangeeta.
He supported the version of other prosecution
witnesses. PW7 stated that on the identification of
the complainant, accused was arrested and his
personal search was conducted vide memos Ex. PW
3/C and Ex. PW 7/A respectively. The said van
bearing registration no. DL-1-CR-1622 was also
seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW3/B. Thereafter
they came back to the police station.
11. PW-8 IO/SI Sangeeta deposed that on
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:05.11.2026
19:40:11
CRL.A. 5/2024 Page 5 of 22

14.02.2018 a call vide DD No. 20 A was attended by
ASI Satish along with Ct. Naveen. When she was
present in the police station, victim along with her
mother, Principal of the school Shri Kailash Sharma
met her. She made inquiries from the victim in the
presence of her mother and got the counseling of the
victim done from NGO official. On the basis of
written complaint Ex. PW3/A given to her by the
mother of the victim child “D” she prepared a tehrir
Ex. PW8/A on the basis of which FIR was
registered. Thereafter, PW-8 got the child victim
‘D’ medically examined. Accused was present in the
police station in the custody of Ct. Naveen. Accused
was arrested on being identified by complainant ‘S’
vide arrest memo Ex. PW 3/C and his personal
search was conducted vide memo Ex. PW 7/A.
Thereafter, she along with complainant and accused
in custody reached near the house of the
complainant and from there Maruti Van bearing
registration no. DL-1-CR-1622 in which incident
had taken place was seized vide seizure memo Ex.
PW 3/B. She got the accused medically examined.
Thereafter on 15.02.2018, she got the statement of
victim ‘D’ recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C and collected
the date of birth proof of the victim child “D” from
her school. On 13.03.2018, she had prepared the
site plan Ex. PW8/B at the instance of complainant
‘S’. After cross examination, prosecution evidence
was closed.”
5. On 20.05.2023, upon the completion of prosecution evidence,
statements of accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C, was recorded, during which accused
claimed that he is innocent and falsely implicated in the case. It was his
defence that he had visited the house of the victim child to clear some
monetary dispute on payment of holiday fares but that the mother of the victim
had slapped him and called the police to take revenge The accused chose not
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:05.11.2026
19:40:11
CRL.A. 5/2024 Page 6 of 22

to lead evidence in his defence.
th
6. The learned Trial Court, vide the impugned judgment dated 10
August, 2023, convicted the appellant and held as under:
“47. In the light of above discussion, the testimony
of prosecution witnesses are found to be trustworthy
and reliable, and the prosecution has succeeded in
proving the guilt of the accused and thus accused is
found to have committed offence as described under
Section 9(m) of POCSO Act punishable u/s 10 of the
POCSO Act. Accordingly accused Anuj @ Ambuz
@ Chhavinder stands convicted for the offence u/s
10 POCSO Act and acquitted for the offence u/s 506
IPC.”
7. Consequent upon the judgment of conviction, the learned Trial Court,
th
vide Order on Sentence dated 10 October, 2023, imposed the following
sentence upon the present appellant:
“13. Perusal of the affidavit shows that prior to
being taken in judicial custody, the convict was
working as a driver earning about 8,000/- per
month. Considering the fact that the convict is
already in JC and the financial condition and
capacity of convict, it is clear that he is not in a
position to compensate the victim. However, the
convict is an able bodied person who was working
as a van driver earlier, hence a fine of Rs. 20,000/-
(Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) is imposed on
convict for the offence punishable under Section 10
POCSO Act and in case of default in payment of
fine, he shall undergo further simple imprisonment
of three months. In accordance with the affidavit of
Ld. Addl. PP for the State, the convict shall pay fine
amount of Rs. 9,078/- (Rupees Nine Thousand
Seventy Eight only) to State towards the expenses
incurred by the prosecution. Out of the remaining
amount of fine, Rs. 10,000/- be paid to the victim
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:05.11.2026
19:40:11
CRL.A. 5/2024 Page 7 of 22

child as part of the compensation and the remaining
be deposited in the Court.
S.
No.
Offence Substantive
Sentence
Fine
1 Section 10
POCSO
ACT
7 Years
(Seven Years)
Rs. 20000/-
R.I.
It is reiterated that all the sentences shall run
concurrently and the benefit of Section 428 Cr.PC
be accorded to the convict.”
On Compensation:
“14. The last question remains is with respect to the
compensation part. After the judgment, an enquiry
was directed to be done by the District Legal Service
Authority in view of the recent judgment of Hon’ble
High Court of Delhi in the case of Karan v. State of
NCT of Delhi Crl.A.No. 352/2020 dated 27.11.2020.
The report of the North West District Legal Service
Authority was received. The convict and the
prosecution also filed their respective affidavits.
… … …
21. Further considering all the factors as
enumerated above, as per Rule 9 of The Protection
of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2020, the law
laid down in X v. State of NCT of Delhi (acting
through its Secretary) (supra) and the facts and
circumstances of the present case, I deem it
appropriate to grant the final compensation to the
tune of amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rs. Three lakhs
Only) to the victim under provision of 33(8) of the
POCSO Act read with Rule 9 of POCSO Rules 2020
in the name of victim/ child and the said amount
shall be released to the victim/ child as per rules.
This amount shall be in addition to the amount if any
awarded as interim compensation to the victim child
by the DLSA/ through Court.”
8. Aggrieved by the aforesaid impugned judgment and order on
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:05.11.2026
19:40:11
CRL.A. 5/2024 Page 8 of 22

sentence, the appellant has challenged both before this Court.
SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT
9. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned
judgment suffers from serious infirmities and that the learned Trial Court
has failed to properly appreciate the evidence on record. It is contended that
the prosecution case is riddled with material contradictions and
inconsistencies in the statements of the prosecutrix and her mother, both
during the course of investigation and at trial, which go to the root of the
prosecution’s case and cast serious doubt on its veracity.
10. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that the
prosecutrix had been travelling with the appellant, who was driving the
same cab, for the past three years, and no such incident had ever been
reported during the said period. Learned counsel submitted that the
possibility of false implication cannot be ruled out, particularly in view of
the previous quarrel between the appellant and the mother of the prosecutrix
over the payment of van fare charges.
11. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that the
statements of the prosecutrix and her mother are contradictory on material
particulars. It is also pointed out that the school principal, in her testimony,
categorically stated that the school had not verified the age of the
prosecutrix, thereby raising questions regarding the documentary basis of
the age determination.
12. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted the alleged
incident took place in broad daylight, at around 2:00 PM, at a public place;
however, the investigating agency failed to collect any CCTV footage from
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:05.11.2026
19:40:11
CRL.A. 5/2024 Page 9 of 22

the adjoining area or examine any independent eyewitness who could have
corroborated the presence of the appellant at the alleged place of
occurrence. Learned counsel submitted that even the independent witness
examined by the prosecution did not support the prosecution’s version of
the alleged incident and had no knowledge thereof.
13. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the prosecution has
failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt and that the learned
Trial Court failed to appreciate the entire evidence in its proper perspective.
That the prosecution was required to establish its case through cogent,
reliable and trustworthy evidence of sterling quality. It is, therefore, prayed
that the impugned judgment of conviction and order on sentence be set
aside and the appellant be acquitted of the charges.
SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT-STATE
14. Learned APP for the State opposed the appeal and submitted that
there are specific allegations by the victim child against the accused which
has been supported by her in her testimony in the court. That the victim
used to be the last student remaining to be dropped from the school van and
the accused took advantage of this fact and committed the offence with her.
Learned APP for the state further submitted that minor contradictions may
occur in the testimony of the witnesses due to lapse of time
15. Learned APP for the State further contended that the learned Trial
Court has passed a well-reasoned judgment after duly appreciating the oral
and documentary evidence led by the prosecution, and there is no perversity
or illegality warranting interference by this Court.
16. Learned APP for the state further submitted that the testimony of the
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:05.11.2026
19:40:11
CRL.A. 5/2024 Page 10 of 22

child victim (PW-1) is cogent, consistent and trustworthy. The victim has
categorically narrated the manner in which the appellant, who was driving
her school van, took advantage of the fact that she was alone in the vehicle
and made her touch his private parts under the pretext of teaching her how
to operate the gears of the vehicle.
17. It is further submitted that the testimony of the child victim stands
corroborated by the testimony of her mother (PW-3), to whom the victim
disclosed the incident immediately upon reaching home.
18. Learned APP for the State also countered the defence raised by the
appellant regarding the alleged dispute over van fare charges. It was
submitted that the incident in question took place in February, whereas the
summer vacations in schools ordinarily commence around May/June.
Therefore, it was contended, the appellant’s explanation that the mother of
the victim had falsely implicated him on account of a dispute relating to the
van fare for the summer vacation period is wholly untenable and does not
inspire confidence.
19. Learned APP for the state further submitted that the prosecution has
established all the foundational facts necessary to attract the statutory
presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act, and the appellant has
failed to rebut the same. The learned Trial Court has, therefore, rightly
convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 10 of the
POCSO Act. That the sentence imposed by the learned Trial Court is in
accordance with law and commensurate with the gravity of the offence,
particularly having regard to the tender age of the victim. The impugned
judgment of conviction and order on sentence are based on a proper
appreciation of the evidence and do not call for any interference by this
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:05.11.2026
19:40:11
CRL.A. 5/2024 Page 11 of 22

Court. Accordingly, the present appeal deserves to be dismissed.
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS
20. This Court has heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused
the material on record.
21. The principal contention of learned counsel for the appellant is that
the prosecution case suffers from material contradictions and
inconsistencies, particularly between the testimonies of the prosecutrix and
her mother. It is further contended that the appellant was falsely implicated
on account of a dispute over van fare charges and that the prosecution has
failed to establish its case through independent evidence or a proper
investigation.
Age of the victim:
22. At the outset, it is pertinent to observe that the age of the victim
stands duly established through the testimony of PW-2, the school
principal, who produced the admission form (Ex. PW-2/A), MCD birth
certificate (Ex. PW-2/B) and the relevant entry in the admission register
(Ex. PW-2/E), all reflecting her date of birth as 13.01.2008. It will be
apposite to refer to the admission form (Ex. PW-2/A) in this regard:
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:05.11.2026
19:40:11
CRL.A. 5/2024 Page 12 of 22

23. Accordingly, on the date of the incident, i.e., 14.02.2018, the victim
was approximately 10 years old. The contention regarding non-verification
of her age by the school principal does not, by itself, discredit the
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:05.11.2026
19:40:11
CRL.A. 5/2024 Page 13 of 22

documentary evidence placed on record.
24. In this regard, the learned Trial Court has also rightly placed reliance
upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ashwani Kumar
Saxena v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 2013 SC 553 , wherein it was
observed that the Court is not expected to conduct a roving enquiry into the
correctness of documents maintained in the ordinary course of business for
determining the age of a person. Further, there was no reason for the parent
of the victim to furnish an incorrect date of birth at such a stage, particularly
when the same is recorded in the regular course of school admission.
Testimony of the Victim:
25. It is well settled that in cases involving sexual offences, the testimony
of the victim, if found to be cogent, credible and trustworthy, can form the
sole basis of conviction without any requirement of independent
corroboration. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in State (NCT of Delhi) v.
Pankaj Chaudhary, (2019) 11 SCC 575 , has reiterated that there is no rule
of law or practice which mandates that the testimony of a prosecutrix must
invariably be corroborated. Similarly, in Ganesan v. State, (2020) 10 SCC
573, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has emphasised that a conviction can rest
upon the testimony of the victim where the same inspires confidence.
26. The principal prosecution witness in the present case is the victim
child (PW-1), whose testimony forms the foundation of the prosecution’s
case. A perusal of her deposition will be apposite at this stage:
Statement u/s
Examination-in-Chief dated
Cross-examination dated
164 Cr. PC
08.03.2019
08.03.2019
I have been residing at the
Van
कल वाले
I was going to school in the
van of Anuj bhaiya for about
address mentioned in the list
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:05.11.2026
19:40:11
CRL.A. 5/2024 Page 14 of 22

Anuj
भैया कह
of witnesses against my
name with my family. My
family consists of myself, my
parents, grandparents, my
younger brother and my
tauji with his family. I am
studying in Sarvodaya
Vidyalaya at C-Block,
Mangol Puri and used to go
to my school by van driven
by Anuj bhaiya at the time of
incident. Now, my mother
drops me at my school. I was
in class-V at the time of
incident.
On 14.02.2018 at about 2.00
p.m. when we were coming
back from my school in the
van and when the van
reached near Kali Mata
Mandir, the van driver
bhaiya Anuj said me that he
will tell me how to change
the gears. Then he put my
hand on his pant at “shu shu
wali jagah” and asked me to
press his shu shu as one
presses the gear. Thereafter,
he threatened me not to tell
it to anyone or else he will
kill me. Thereafter, after
reaching home, I informed
my mother about the
three years before this case.
Prior to this incident, Anuj
bhaiya never tried to commit
any such act with me. It is
wrong to suggest that Anuj
bhaiya used to treat me like a
younger sister. When Anuj
bhaiya came to our house after
my mother called the
principal, he said that he had
not done any such act with me.
Apart from me, 18-19 more
students were also travelling
in the said van to the school.
None of those students ever
told me about any act of
misbehaviour with them by the
accused. Accused used to pick
me at around 7.00 a.m. When
accused used to pick me, there
was no student in the van. The
second stop was the next gali
of my house and from there one
girl used to board the van. My
house is at a distance of 10-15
minutes from the place of
incident. No other student near
my house used to take the van
of the accused. Accused used
to pick and drop me at the
corner of the gali and my
house was at a short distance
from there. My school get over
रहेथे ͩक तुझे
Gear
डालना
ͧसखाता
हूँ।
2
दोपहरके बजे
थे
ͩफर भैया ने
जबरद èती मेरा
हाथ पकड़कर
अपने प ɇट पर
ȧ
अपनीसुसूक
जगह पर रखा
था।भैयाकहरहे
Gear
थे जैसे
दबाते ह ɇ वैसे
दबा। ͩफर भैया
नेकहा ͩक अगर
घरम Ʌͩकसी को
भीबतायातोमेरे
कोजानसेमार
द Ʌगे।
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:05.11.2026
19:40:11
CRL.A. 5/2024 Page 15 of 22

incident on which she got
angry and called the
principal of my school on
phone. After some time, Anuj
bhaiya came to our house
and my mother slapped him.
My mother called the police
who came and we all went to
PS. Accused was also
brought to PS separately by
the police.
…
I can identify the accused, if
shown to me.
At this stage, witness has
correctly identified the
accused on being seen him
on LCD screen.
Police did not take me to the
place of incident, however I
have told the police about
the place of incident.
at 1.30 p.m. Students of one
more school were also carried
by the accused with us. Four
students used to sit on the front
seat along with the driver seat.
My school is upto class-VIII
and students upto class-V were
ferried by the accused in his
van. Students using the van
were not sitting at a particular
seat and used to change the
seat. I generally used to sit in
the back seat in the van.
The van charges were Rs.500/-
per month. It is wrong to
suggest that my parents were
defaulter in paying the van
charges and when the accused
demanded his dues, he has
been falsely implicated in this
case. It is wrong to suggest
that I am deposing falsely.
27. The above record shows that the prosecutrix has given a clear and
specific account of the incident. She categorically stated that on 14.02.2018,
while she was returning from school in the van driven by the appellant, the
latter, under the pretext of teaching her how to change gears, placed her
hand on his private part and asked her to press the same as one presses the
gear. She further deposed that the appellant threatened her with dire
consequences in case she disclosed the incident to anyone. Her testimony,
therefore, not only describes the specific act committed by the appellant but
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:05.11.2026
19:40:11
CRL.A. 5/2024 Page 16 of 22

also explains the circumstances in which the incident occurred.
28. A perusal of the cross-examination of PW-1 reveals that despite
extensive questioning, nothing material could be elicited to discredit her
version or shake the credibility of her testimony. Rather, she remained
consistent with respect to the essential particulars of the occurrence,
including the date and approximate time of the incident, the identity of the
appellant, the pretext under which the act was committed and the nature of
the act itself. The suggestions put to her regarding the alleged dispute over
van charges and false implication were specifically denied. No material
contradiction or inconsistency could be elicited which would go to the root
of the prosecution’s case.
Corroboration by the Mother of the Victim
29. The testimony of the victim (PW-1) also finds corroboration from
her mother (PW-3), who has deposed about the circumstances immediately
following the incident and the disclosure made by the victim. In this regard,
it would be apposite to refer to the relevant portion of her testimony, which
reads as under:
“On 14.02.2018 at about 2.00 p.m., accused
dropped my daughter outside the gali. I saw that my
daughter was coming while weeping. On inquiry,
she told me that “aaj bhaiya ne mere saath
badtamiji ki”. I further made inquiry from her and
asked her to explain what badtamiji was done by the
accused then she told me that when all the children
were dropped and bhaiya was bringing me back to
home, on the way near Q-Block when they reached
near public dustbin(khatta), accused Anuj asked the
victim child to teach how to put gear in the gear and
he suddenly dragged her towards him and put her
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:05.11.2026
19:40:11
CRL.A. 5/2024 Page 17 of 22

hand on his private part. Thereafter, he put his hand
on her hand and started pressing it. My daughter
further told me that accused threatened her not to
disclose about this to anyone else she will be killed.
I immediately called my husband at Noida who
advised me to call the Principal and thereafter to the
police. Accordingly, I called the Principal and
within 10-15 minutes, accused came to my house
and started saying that he is innocent and victim
was telling a lie. I slapped him and apprehended
him and called the police at 100 number. Police
came to my house and took the accused along with
them. Police asked me to reach the PS with my
daughter. I reached there where Principal of the
school was also called.”
30. A perusal of the aforesaid testimony reveals that PW-3 has materially
corroborated the version of the victim, particularly with respect to the latter
returning home in a distressed condition and immediately disclosing the
incident to her. Her testimony further lends assurance to the prosecution’s
case regarding the sequence of events that followed the disclosure,
including the prompt approach to the school principal and the police.
31. Thus, the testimony of PW-3 provides further assurance to the
otherwise consistent and trustworthy testimony of the victim.
Defence of False Implication
32. The principal defence raised by the appellant is that he has been
falsely implicated on account of an alleged dispute with the mother of the
victim over payment of van fare charges, particularly for the period of
summer vacations. However, the said defence does not find support from
the evidence on record. PW-3, during her cross-examination, specifically
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:05.11.2026
19:40:11
CRL.A. 5/2024 Page 18 of 22

denied any such dispute and voluntarily stated that all van drivers charged
in the same manner and, therefore, no quarrel had ever taken place between
her and the appellant on that account. She also denied having reprimanded
the appellant either for demanding additional charges or for arriving late to
pick up her daughter. Relevant part of her Cross-examination is produced
below:
“...I used to ferry charges of Rs.500/- per month to
the accused. Earlier my son was also used the
services of the said van for one year and I used to
give Rs.500/- as ferry charges to the accused for my
son also. My son went in the said van only for one
year and thereafter he got admitted in KVS at TP
Block, Pitampura. It is wrong to suggest that I had
a dispute with the accused over payment of ferry
charges for the period of summer vacations. Vol. All
van driver charges same and hence no quarrel ever
took place between me and the accused over this
issue...”
33. Further, PW-1, during her cross-examination, also denied the
suggestion that her parents were defaulters in payment of van charges and
that the appellant had been falsely implicated when he demanded his dues.
The defence, therefore, remained confined to suggestions put to the
prosecution witnesses, without any substantive material being brought on
record in its support.
Discussion on Section 9 (m) of the POCSO Act punishable u/s 10 of the
POCSO Act:
34. The offence under section 9 (m) of the POCSO Act has been defined
as:
“9. Aggravated sexual assault.—( m) whoever
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:05.11.2026
19:40:11
CRL.A. 5/2024 Page 19 of 22

commits sexual assault on a child below twelve
years; or”
Further Section 7 of the POCSO Act defines sexual assault as:
“7. Sexual assault.—Whoever, with sexual intent
touches the vagina, penis, anus or breast of the child
or makes the child touch the vagina, penis, anus or
breast of such person or any other person, or does
any other act with sexual intent which involves
physical contact without penetration is said to
commit sexual assault.”
35. The offence punishable under Section 10 of the POCSO Act is
attracted when the act of sexual assault, as defined under Section 7, is
committed in any of the aggravated circumstances enumerated under
Section 9. In the present case, the prosecution has successfully established
the ingredients of the offence falling under Section 9(m) read with Section
10 of the POCSO Act. The testimony of PW-1 (victim) establishes that the
appellant made her touch his penis under the pretext of teaching her how to
operate the gears of the van, thereby satisfying the ingredients of sexual
assault under Section 7 of the Act. Further, the age of the victim, as already
discussed, stands established to be approximately 10 years on the date of
the incident, thereby attracting the aggravated circumstance contemplated
under Section 9(m). The testimony of PW-1, which has remained consistent
and trustworthy, also finds assurance from the testimony of her mother
(PW-3) regarding the immediate disclosure and the circumstances
following the incident.
36. On a cumulative consideration of the testimony of PW-1, her
statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the surrounding
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:05.11.2026
19:40:11
CRL.A. 5/2024 Page 20 of 22

circumstances and the other evidence led by the prosecution, the statutory
presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act, this Court finds that the
learned Trial Court has correctly appreciated the evidence and arrived at
the conclusion that the appellant had committed sexual assault upon the
victim. The findings recorded by the learned Trial Court do not suffer from
any perversity or material infirmity warranting interference by this Court.
37. This Court also notes that the appellant was entrusted with the
responsibility of driving the vehicle used for transporting the prosecutrix.
A school van driver is entrusted with the safety and well-being of children,
much like a parent entrusts the care of their child to him. The children, in
turn, repose their trust in the driver, who is responsible for safely ferrying
them from their homes to school and back. Such a heinous act is wholly
unbecoming of the trust and responsibility reposed in a person holding such
a position. Sexual assault is a grave and reprehensible offence and cannot
be countenanced under any circumstances.
CONCLUSION
38. In view of the foregoing discussion, the conviction of the appellant
for the offences punishable under Section 10 of the POCSO Act, as
recorded by the learned Trial Court, calls for no interference. The sentence
imposed upon the appellant, including the direction for payment of
compensation to the victim, also does not warrant interference, particularly
in view of the nature, gravity of the offences, purpose behind the POCSO
Act, and the circumstances of the victim.
39. Therefore, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. The pending
application(s), if any, stand disposed of in the above terms
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:05.11.2026
19:40:11
CRL.A. 5/2024 Page 21 of 22

40. Upon perusal of the record, it is noted that the sentence of the
appellant was suspended vide order dated 24.04.2026, pursuant to which he
was released on bail. In view of the dismissal of the present appeal and the
upholding of the judgment of conviction and order on sentence, the
appellant is directed to surrender before the concerned Jail Superintendent
within a period of four weeks from today to undergo the remaining
sentence. The appellant shall be entitled to the benefit of Section 428 CrPC
in accordance with law.
41. A copy of this judgment be sent to the learned Trial Court and the
concerned Jail Superintendent for information and necessary compliance.
42. The judgment be uploaded on the website forthwith.
MADHU JAIN
(JUDGE)
NOVEMBER 5, 2026/rm/gs
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:BHARTI
Signing Date:05.11.2026
19:40:11
CRL.A. 5/2024 Page 22 of 22