Supreme Court: In a special leave petition filed against the judgment filed passed by Chhattisgarh High Court, wherein the Court upheld the conviction and sentence of a man under Sections 363 and 366 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (‘POCSO’) Act, 2012, the division bench of Ahsanuddin Amanullah and S.V.N. Bhatti, JJ. granted interim bail to the convict to enable him to reunite with the prosecutrix (now his wife) and their minor child, after both expressed their desire to live together as a family.
Background
The case originated from a missing person complaint filed in December 2016 by the mother of the prosecutrix, which led to the registration of an FIR under Section 363 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) and Sections 16 and 17 of the POCSO Act. In May 2018, the prosecutrix was found living with the convict. At the time of recovery, the prosecutrix was discovered to be pregnant, and the convict was subsequently arrested.
The Trial Court convicted the convict for offences under Sections 363 and 366 of the IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act. The convict was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years, 5 years, and 10 years, respectively, with all sentences to run concurrently.
The convicts’ appeal was dismissed by the Chhattisgarh High Court by an order dated 25-02-2025. The High Court upheld the conviction, observing that the prosecutrix was a minor at the time of the incident, as evidenced by her school records, documents which the convict had failed to effectively challenge.
Subsequently, the convict approached the Supreme Court, contending that the relationship between him and the prosecutrix was consensual. He further submitted that the Trial Court and the High Court had failed to correctly apply the legal framework for age determination under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
Analysis and Decision
In compliance with the earlier directions of the Court, the presence of the parties was secured before the Court. The convict, who was in judicial custody, was produced by the police personnel and was duly identified by them. The prosecutrix, along with her minor daughter, was also brought by the local police and was properly identified.
The Court afforded an opportunity to the convict and prosecutrix to interact with each other. Following their discussion, both parties expressed their willingness to live together as husband and wife, along with their child, thereby demonstrating their intention to reunite as a family.
After considering the modalities under which such an arrangement could be facilitated, the Court issued the following directions:
-
The convict was ordered to be released on interim bail upon furnishing his personal bond as well as a personal bond executed by prosecutrix (his wife).
-
The District Magistrate, Baloda Bazar, Chhattisgarh, was directed to allot a government quarter, out of those available for Class IV employees in Palari Block to the convict and his family on a temporary basis, until further orders of the Court. The convict was required to take his wife and minor child to the allotted residence and live with them.
-
The Court requested the District Magistrate to consider providing the convict contractual, temporary, or ad-hoc employment under any applicable State or Central Government scheme to help the family sustain themselves during the initial period.
-
Keeping in view the financial condition of the parties, the Court directed the State authorities to ensure their presence before the Court, including making arrangements for their boarding, lodging, and travel expenses from their native place.
-
The Trial Court was directed to immediately pass the necessary orders for release of the convict on interim bail upon receipt of the Supreme Court’s order. Until then, the convict was to be taken back into custody and handed over to the Jail Superintendent concerned.
-
The Court directed the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Baloda Bazar, along with the local Mahila Police, to depute a counsellor to interact with the convict, prosecutrix, and their families so as to build mutual trust and to ensure that the respondent and her daughter were able to live in the matrimonial home safely and peacefully.
The matter was directed to be listed on 2-12-2025, with instructions that the convict, his parents, prosecutrix, and the minor child remain present before the Court on the said date.
[Hemchand v. State of Chhattisgarh, Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (CRL.) No. 10896/2025, decided on 25-09-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For Convict(s) : Ms. Garima Bajaj, AOR Mr. Zeeshan Ahmed, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mrs. Prerna Dhall, Adv., Mr. Ambuj Swaroop, Adv., Mr. Kapil Katare, Adv., Ms. Rajnandani Kumari, Adv., Ms. Minakshi Pandey, Adv., Mr. Prashant Singh, AOR
Buy Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 HERE
Buy Penal Code, 1860 HERE
Buy Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 HERE
