Dinesh Kumar Jaldhari v. State of Chhattisgarh; 2025 INSC 1317 - POCSO - Ocular Evidence vs Medical Evidence
Criminal Trial - The medical evidence will take a backseat and even if do not corroborate with the ocular evidence, where the ocular evidence is consistent and cogent, the later would be allowed to prevail. (Para 5.2) [Context: Conviction of POCSO accused upheld - Sentence reduced]
Case Info
Case Details
- Case name: Dinesh Kumar Jaldhari v. State of Chhattisgarh.
- Neutral citation: 2025 INSC 1317.
- Coram: Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice N.V. Anjaria.
- Judgment date: November 13, 2025.
Caselaws and citations
The judgment does not cite specific reported precedents by name; it relies on the settled principle that consistent ocular testimony can prevail over non-corroborative medical evidence, which is articulated within the judgment text.
Statutes / laws referred
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO): Sections 7, 8, 9(m), 10.
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: Sections 376, 376-AB (charged, though conviction was under POCSO).
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 164 (recording of the victim’s statement).
LawLens - AI-Powered Legal Research for Indian Laws
Discover AI-powered legal research tools for Indian law professionals
