MP High Court Upholds 20-Year Sentence in Gangrape Case, Clarifies Age Test Protocol
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has dismissed a petition filed by two individuals sentenced to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment for gangraping a minor in Satna district. A division bench reiterated that an ossification test to determine a rape survivor's age is only necessary when relevant legal documents proving age are unavailable.
Court's Firm Stance on Age Determination Procedures
The bench comprising Justice Vivek Agarwal and Justice RCS Bisen delivered their judgment on March 17, 2026, addressing a criminal revision petition from Kailash Kol and Kamlesh. Both were convicted by a special POCSO court in Satna district in 2015 for gangraping a minor.
The court emphasized that when proper age documentation exists under the law, police failure to conduct an ossification test—even if recommended by examining doctors—does not impact the case's validity. This position aligns with previous rulings by the MP High Court in similar cases.
Defense Argument and Court's Rejection
The appellants' counsel argued that prosecution witness Dr. Alka Mahule medically examined the victim and advised an X-ray. The resulting report estimated the victim's age between 17 and 18 years, suggesting she might have been above 18 at the time of the incident.
However, the judges countered this by stating, "In the present case, we have before us two documents which support the case of the prosecutrix that she was below 16 years of age at the time when the incident took place. These documents can be used for ascertaining the age of the prosecutrix as per Rule 12(3)(b). Therefore, the trial court was right in relying on those documents."
Legal Framework for Age Determination
The court clarified that ossification tests become necessary only when documents specified under Section 94(2) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 are not available. This provision outlines acceptable documents for age proof, including:
- Birth certificates from school or municipal authorities
- Matriculation or equivalent certificates
- Documents issued by government departments
The judgment reinforces that when such documents are present, they take precedence over medical age estimation methods. This prevents unnecessary delays and maintains the integrity of legal proceedings in POCSO cases.
The court's decision underscores the judiciary's commitment to protecting minors and ensuring that technicalities do not undermine justice in sexual assault cases. By upholding the 20-year sentence, the bench sends a strong message about the seriousness of crimes against children.
