Dismissed¶55

Sh. K. Lalawmpuia v. The State of Mizoram and Anr.

Gauhati HC15 Jun 2026CRL.A(J)/32/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gauhati High Court Aizawl Bench; Criminal Appeal (J) No.32 of 2025; decided 16.06.2026; rape of 13-year-old biological daughter; IPC S.376(3) read with POCSO Act S.6; conviction and 20-year rigorous imprisonment upheld; DNA profiling matched seminal stains; intoxication no sympathy; compensation to victim directed via Mizoram State Legal Services Authority within 3 months; S.428 CrPC set-off; appeal dismissed.

What did the court decide?

No relief to the appellant; appeal dismissed and Trial Court Record ordered to be sent back forthwith. Victim (not the appellant) to receive suitable compensation via the Mizoram State Legal Services Authority within 3 months; fees of the Amicus Curiae and Legal Aid Counsel to be paid by the High Court Legal Services Authority as per prescribed norms. ¶55

Sh. K. Lalawmpuia Vs The State of Mizoram and… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Gauhati HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶55

Issue for consideration

Whether the conviction of the accused/appellant under Section 376(3) IPC read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 by the Trial Court was justified on the evidence. +2 more

¶53

Court's answer

Based on the evidence on record, it was absolutely justified for the Trial Court to have convicted and sentenced the accused/appellant under Section 376(3) IPC read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012.

¶53

Ratio / Principle

The judgment and order of conviction and sentence of the Trial Court does not require any interference; the appeal is dismissed.

¶54

Key takeaways

The victim ought to have been given compensation; since the Trial Court did not do so, the Mizoram State Legal Services Authority is directed to take necessary steps to give suitable compensation to the victim within 3 months in accordance with law.ratio¶59

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court (Aizawl Bench), Criminal Appeal (J) No.32 of 2025 (decided 16.06.2026): Appeal against conviction under Section 376(3) IPC read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and sentence of 20 years' rigorous imprisonment (Fast Track Special Court, Aizawl, judgment dated 12.12.2024) for raping the appellant's 13-year-old biological daughter on the night of 26.09.2020 — dismissed. The victim's testimony (PW-2), corroborated by her mother (PW-3), maternal uncle/FIR informant (PW-1), medical findings (torn hymen; swabs sent to FSL) and DNA profiling showing seminal stains on the vaginal swab matched the accused, was found consistent without embellishment or contradiction; the allegation was not effectively denied, the accused having admitted in his Section 313 Cr.PC examination to assaulting the victim while in a state of intoxication. The Court held the conviction 'absolutely justified', termed the act 'a beastly act, brooking of no sympathy of any kind', and found no interference warranted. Observing that the Trial Court had awarded no compensation, the High Court directed the Mizoram State Legal Services Authority to provide suitable compensation to the victim within 3 months; set-off under Section 428 Cr.PC as directed by the Trial Court was noted; Trial Court Record to be returned forthwith and fees of the Amicus Curiae and Legal Aid Counsel payable by the High Court Legal Services Authority.

¶1

Page No.# 1/8

¶2

GAHC030003082025

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

(AIZAWL BENCH)

¶5

Criminal Appeal (J) No.32 of 2025

¶6

Sh. K. Lalawmpuia, Son of K. Lalzarliana, Resident of Lenchim, Saitual, District: Mizoram, P/A Khatla South, Aizawl.

¶7

…… Appellant

¶8

-Versus-

¶9

The State of Mizoram, Aizawl.

¶10

Sh. Lalsiamthara, Son of P.L. Muanzova, Resident of Saitual.

¶11

…… Respondents

¶12

– BEFORE – HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶13

For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Lalpianfela Chawngthu, Amicus Curiae. For the Respondent(s) : Ms. Linda L. Fambawl, Public Prosecutor, Mizoram for respondent No.1.

¶14

: Mr. H. Zodinsanga, Legal Aid Counsel for respondent No.2.

¶15

Date on which judgment is reserved : 12.06.2026. Date of pronouncement of judgment : 16.06.2026 .

¶16

Page No.# 2/8

¶17

Whether the pronouncement is of the operative part of the judgment?

¶18

: Not Applicable.

¶19

Whether the full judgment has been pronounced?

¶20

: Yes.

¶21

J UDGMENT & ORDER (CAV)

¶22

(Ashutosh Kumar, CJ)

¶23

We have heard Mr. Lalpianfela Chawngthu, learned Amicus for the appellant; Ms. Linda L. Fambawl, learned Public Prosecutor, Mizoram for respondent No.1 and Mr. H. Zodinsanga, learned Legal Aid Counsel for respondent No.2.

¶24

2. The accused/appellant stands convicted under Section 376(3) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter to be referred as “ IPC ” ) read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter to be referred as the “POCSO Act, 2012” ) vide judgment dated 12.12.2024 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Special Court, Aizawl, Mizoram and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 20(twenty) years. It appears that no fine has been imposed upon the accused/appellant.

¶25

Vide the impugned judgment, it has been directed that the period of detention of the accused/ appellant in judicial custody as a trial prisoner shall be set off from the term of sentence in accordance with the provisions contained under Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as the “ Cr.PC ” ) .

¶26

The accused/appellant is said to have raped his biological daughter.

¶27

Page No.# 3/8

¶28

3. The maternal uncle of the victim, who has been examined as PW-1, lodged the First Information Report (FIR) on 27.09.2020 alleging that in the night of 26.09.2020, the accused/appellant committed rape on his own daughter, a 13(thirteen) years old girl, while she along with her 3(three) sisters had been residing in a rented house along with the accused/ appellant.

¶29

Based on the afore-noted written complaint, All Women Police Station Case No.34/2020 dated 27.09.2020 was registered for investigation against the accused/appellant under Section 376(3) of the IPC read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012.

¶30

4. The Police, after investigation, submitted charge-sheet against the accused/appellant, whereupon cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for Trial.

¶31

The Trial Court, after having examined 10(ten) witnesses on behalf of the prosecution, convicted and sentenced the accused/ appellant, as aforesaid.

¶32

5. During the trial, the maternal uncle of the victim (PW-1) disclosed that his sister was married to the accused/appellant in the year 2006. From the wedlock, 4(four) daughters were born, whereafter his sister separated from her husband (accused/ appellant) in the year 2020. After separation, his sister started residing in Zokhawthar for earning her livelihood, whereas the accused/appellant along with his 4(four) daughters stayed in a rented house at Khatla South, Aizawl.

¶33

6. He further deposed that on 27.09.2020, he had received

¶34

Page No.# 4/8

¶35

telephonic information from his sister (mother of the victim/PW-3) that the accused/appellant had raped her daughter. After receiving the telephone call, PW-1 lodged the FIR. He also enquired from the victim, who had narrated the incident in great detail. The Police had seized the original Birth Certificate of the victim. The victim had been sent for medical examination. Her statement under Section 164 of the Cr.PC also was recorded.

¶36

7. The mother of the victim, namely, PW-3, confirmed at the trial that the victim was born on 18.09.2007. She had received a message from the victim that she had been sexually assaulted by the accused/appellant in the night of 26.09.2020. She thereafter contacted PW-1, her brother, who took the initiative to lodge the FIR. She came to Aizawl on 30.09.2020 when the Birth Certificate of the victim was taken by the Police. She further clarified before the Trial Court that she came to know about the incident as told to her by the victim herself.

¶37

8. The victim, who has been examined as PW-2, has supported the incident in great detail. After talking about her family background, she narrated before the Trial Court that while she was asleep, the accused/appellant arrived near her, disrobed her and after some foreplay without her consent and ignoring her opposition, committed rape with her. She was absolutely shocked and scared as well. In the next morning, using the telephone of her father (accused/appellant) who was asleep in the home, she messaged her mother (PW-3).

¶38

She had given her statement to the Police and also gave her statement under Section 164 of the Cr.pc, which was recorded by a

¶39

Page No.# 5/8

¶40

Judicial Officer.

¶41

9. A cousin sister of PW-3 (mother of the victim) has been examined as PW-4 before whose presence the Birth Certificate of the victim was produced before the Police.

¶42

10. A Constable posted at All Women Police Station (PW-5) has deposed that in his presence the underwear of the victim was seized, which she had worn at the time of the incident. Similarly, a lady Constable (PW-6) was also present when the undergarment of the victim was seized.

¶43

11. A Gynaecologist posted at Civil Hospital, Aizawl (PW-7) had medically examined the victim on 27.09.2020 at 12:00 PM after obtaining her consent. She found the victim to be well built with no physical or mental problem at the time of clinical examination, nor did she find her under the influence of any alcohol or drugs. There were no marks of violence on her body. The genital examination revealed that the hymen was torn at seven o’clock position. Since the victim had not taken bath after the incident, 3(three) swab smears of the hymen and vagina were taken which were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory for examination along with the underwear of the victim. However, from the medical examination conducted by her on the victim, she could not conclude positively whether the hymen rupture was old or fresh.

¶44

12. The accused/appellant was also medically examined on 27.09.2020 by PW-8, who confirmed that he was in a position to perform sexual activities.

¶45

Page No.# 6/8

¶46

13. The Investigator of the case (PW-12) disclosed before the Trial Court that from the Birth Certificate of the victim seized by him, she was found to be born on 18.09.2007. The accused/appellant was arrested on 27.09.2020. Before him, the accused/appellant had admitted his guilt. He has further deposed that DNA profiling was done with respect to the victim and the accused/appellant, which report revealed that seminal stains on the vaginal swab were of the accused/appellant. After taking into account the statement of the witnesses under Section 161 of the Cr.PC and the allegations supported by the medical and forensic reports, he submitted charge-sheet against the accused/appellant under Section 376(3) of the IPC read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012.

¶47

14. The accused/appellant in his examination under Section 313 of the Cr.PC, admitted to consuming alcohol and taking substance. In the night when the occurrence had taken place, he had consumed alcohol and two pills of methamphetamine. Though he denied that he had raped the victim and that later he had apologized to her, but answered in the affirmative when he was questioned whether he had assaulted the victim by touching her private parts and raping her, but complimented such statement by saying that he did not act intentionally. The act was committed by him in a state of intoxication.

¶48

15. Nothing has been brought on record to indicate any false accusation of the accused/ appellant. The victim is the eldest of the siblings, all of whom stayed with the accused/appellant.

¶49

16. What clearly appears from the deposition of the witnesses is

¶50

Page No.# 7/8

¶51

that there had been no past history of the accused/appellant ever having committed such an act with the victim or with anyone of the other siblings. The mother of the victim also had never raised any complaint in the past about any sexual misdemeanor of the accused/appellant. In fact, it was with the consent of the mother that her daughters continued to reside with the accused/ appellant when she had separated from him and had moved to a different location. But, the details of the act disclosed by the victim in her statement recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of the Cr.PC as also during the trial are consistent, without admitting of any embellishment or contradiction.

¶52

17. The allegation was also not effectively denied by the accused/appellant in any manner whatsoever. It appears that on the fateful night, the accused/ appellant lost control of his senses and committed rape of his own daughter in a state of intoxication. This was a beastly act, brooking of no sympathy of any kind.

¶53

18. Based on the aforesaid evidence, it was absolutely justified for the Trial Court to have convicted and sentenced the accused/appellant as aforesaid.

¶54

19. The judgment and order of conviction and sentence thus does not require any interference.

¶55

20. The appeal is dismissed.

¶56

21. The Trial Court Record (TCR) be sent back forthwith.

¶57

22. However, we are of the view that the victim ought to have

¶58

Page No.# 8/8

¶59

been given compensation. Since that has not been done by the Trial Court, we direct the Mizoram State Legal Services Authority to take necessary steps for giving a suitable compensation to the victim within a period of 3(three) months from today in accordance with law.

¶60

23. In appreciation of the assistance rendered by the learned Amicus Curiae and the learned Legal Aid Counsel representing the respondent No.2, the fees due to them shall be paid by the High Court Legal Services Authority as per the prescribed norms.

¶61

JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE

¶62

Comparing Assistant

Sh. K. Lalawmpuia v. The State of Mizoram and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sh. K. Lalawmpuia v. The State of Mizoram and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

In Re- Construction of Working Women Hostel at Vengthlang, Champhai Vs The State of Mizoram r/b the Chief Secretary and 9 Ors.

Sh. B. Lalramliana Vs State of Mizoram and Anr.

Smt. Lalhmunsiami and Anr. Vs The State of Mizoram

Sh. Lalsangzela Vs The State of Mizoram and Anr.

Assam Government Marketing Corporation Ltd. and Anr. Vs Loni Bhagawati

Sh. Vanlalramropuia Vs The State of Mizoram