STATE OF U.P versus SONU KUSHWAHA

STATE OF U.P versus SONU KUSHWAHA

Where the accused penetrated his penis into the mouth of a child below twelve years, clause (m) of Section 5 makes the offence an aggravated penetrative sexual assault and Section 6 (as in force at the time of the offence) requires imposition of the minimum sentence of rigorous imprisonment for ten years; the High Court erred in treating it as only Section 4 penetrative sexual assault and in reducing the sentence, and the trial court judgment must be restored.

Parties
Appellant: State of U.P.; Respondent: Sonu Kushwaha
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
05 July 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court From the High Court Judgment Dated 18.11.2021 in CRLA No.5415 of 2018
Outcome
Appeal allowed; impugned High Court judgment quashed and set aside; trial court judgment restored.
Legal Topics
Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault, Sentencing, Statutory Interpretation
Criminal Law Child Protection Sexual Offences Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault Sentencing Statutory Interpretation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

State of U.P.

Appellant

Sonu Kushwaha

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court From the High Court Judgment Dated 18.11.2021 in CRLA No.5415 of 2018

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act
  2. 2 Whether the High Court erred in holding the offence to be only penetrative sexual assault under Section 4 and in reducing the sentence

Ratio Decidendi

Where the accused penetrated his penis into the mouth of a child below twelve years, clause (m) of Section 5 makes the offence an aggravated penetrative sexual assault and Section 6 (as in force at the time of the offence) requires imposition of the minimum sentence of rigorous imprisonment for ten years; the High Court erred in treating it as only Section 4 penetrative sexual assault and in reducing the sentence, and the trial court judgment must be restored.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; impugned High Court judgment quashed and set aside; trial court judgment restored.

Orders

  • Impugned judgment and order dated 18.11.2021 of the High Court in CRLA No.5415 of 2018 quashed and set aside
  • Judgment and order dated 24.08.2018 of the learned 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Special Judge POCSO Act, Jhansi restored