LexStreak
Read free →
Supreme Court of India· 17 September 2026

Is the Section 29 presumption under the POCSO Act absolute, even before foundational facts are established?

DEEPAK IN JC v. STATE GOVT. OF NCT DELHI
2026 INSC 1008
Coram: Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra · Justice N.V. Anjaria
🔖 Save this judgment🔔 Follow s.29 Protection of Children from…📬 Get today's judgments
View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.
Answer

The presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act is not absolute and operates only after the prosecution establishes the foundational facts.

No. The presumptions in Sections 29 and 30 of the POCSO Act are not absolute presumptions; they come into operation only when the prosecution first establishes the foundational facts, and they are rebuttable, so the courts are not absolved from their essential duty to analyse the evidence and must not mechanically accept the prosecution version. Here the presumption stood rebutted as the ocular, medical and forensic evidence was contradictory.

Headnote

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — ss.29, 30 — Statutory Presumption — Reverse Burden — Preponderance Of Probability — Sterling Witness — Acquittal — Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — ss.29, 30 — Presumption Rebuttable, Not Absolute — Held: The presumptions in Sections 29 and 30 of the POCSO Act are not absolute and operate only once the prosecution establishes the foundational facts. Courts must still weigh the evidence with the usual principles. (¶7) Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s.29 — Standard Of Proof — Beyond Reasonable Doubt — Held further: Even with a reverse burden, the prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, while the accused rebuts on a preponderance of probability, including by showing gaps and mismatch of ocular and medical evidence. (¶7) Evidence — Sole Testimony Of Prosecutrix — Sterling Witness — Consistency From Initial Statement — Held further: Sole evidence can prove the offence only if the witness is sterling, consistent from the initial statement to the court and matching the scientific evidence. Appeals allowed; appellant acquitted. (¶5, 10)

Headnote

You've used your free headnotes this month

The answer above and the Court's own paragraphs stay free. LexStreak's full headnote on this judgment needs an account — a free one opens it again.

Create my free account
In the Court's own words
Paragraph 7Proceeding further, in the instant case, a close examination of the manner of appreciation of evidence and the consequent findings recorded by the Trial Court go to show that the Trial Court concluded that the prosecution could prove that the appellant-accused took the minor child from the lawful custody of her guardians, thereby the essential ingredients of the offence of kidnapping as defined under Section 361, IPC were established. The Trial Court, thereafter, proceeded to refer to Section 29 of the POCSO Act and with such reference in the background, proceeded to consider and appreciate the evidence concerning the commission of offence under the POCSO Act. It appeared on an attentive reading of the reasoning supplied by the Trial Court that it discussed and analysed the evidence under the shadow of Section 29 of the POCSO Act. Section 29 creates a statutory presumption, to ultimately conclude that the accused was guilty of the offence under the POCSO Act, liable to be sentenced for such offence.
Acts & Sections
s.29 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012s.30 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012s.6 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012s.363 Indian Penal Code, 1860

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of DEEPAK IN JC v. STATE GOVT. OF NCT DELHI — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment
Must an accused rebut a presumption of guilt under the POCSO Act beyond reasonable doubt?Can the sole evidence of a prosecutrix prove the offence unless she is a sterling witness?
Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Supreme Court of India. Corrections