GYANENDRA SINGH @ RAJA SINGH VERSUS STATE OF U.P. 2025 (SC) 299

(Judgement)

The Bench Comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta

Introduction

The Supreme Court ruled that when an offence is punishable under both the POCSO Act and IPC(Now BNS,2023), the offender must be sentenced under the provision prescribing the higher punishment, as per Section 42 of the POCSO Act. The Court also held that the High Court erred in enhancing the sentence without a State appeal for enhancement.

Facts

The appellant was convicted for sexually assaulting his minor daughter under Sections 376(2)(f) & 376(2)(i) of IPC (Now Section 64 of BNS,2023) and Sections 3 and Section 4 of the POCSO Act. The trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment under IPC and imposed a fine. The High Court upheld the conviction but enhanced the sentence to life imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life.

Issues

Whether Section 42A of the POCSO Act overrides the higher punishment under IPC.
Whether the High Court erred in enhancing the sentence in an appeal filed by the accused, when no appeal for enhancement was filed by the State.

Contention of the Petitioner

Argued that Section 42A of the POCSO Act should override IPC provisions, meaning punishment should be under POCSO Act, not IPC. Contended that the High Court wrongly enhanced his sentence when he only appealed against the conviction.

Contention of the Respondent

Emphasized that Section 42 of POCSO Act mandates applying the higher punishment if offences are punishable under both laws. Defended that IPC Sections 376(2)(f) and 376(2)(i) prescribe a higher punishment (life imprisonment for the remainder of natural life).

Court Analysis

IPC Sections 376(2)(f) and 376(2)(i) provide greater punishment than POCSO Act, so the appellant was rightly sentenced under IPC as per Section 42 of POCSO Act. Section 42A (which gives overriding effect to POCSO Act) does not override the punishment rule in Section 42. The High Court could not enhance the sentence in an appeal by the accused, unless the State had filed an appeal for enhancement.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction under IPC & POCSO Act but modified the sentence by removing the "natural life" stipulation. The appellant will serve life imprisonment but not necessarily for the remainder of his natural life. Additionally, a fine of ₹5,00,000 was imposed in favor of the victim. Appeal partly allowed.

Posted By: Aishwarya Chourasia

Back