Punishment for penetrative sexual assault
Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 deals with punishment for penetrative sexual assault. ] Whoever commits penetrative sexual assault shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than [ten years] but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine. The Act came into force on 14 Nov 2012.
1[(1)] Whoever commits penetrative sexual assault shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than 2[ten years] but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.
3[(2) Whoever commits penetrative sexual assault on a child below sixteen years of age shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than twenty years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life, which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of natural life of that person and shall also be liable to fine.
(3) The fine imposed under sub-section (1) shall be just and reasonable and paid to the victim to meet the medical expenses and rehabilitation of such victim.]
Section 4, The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (Act 32 of 2012).
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
Referred to by 1
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
A (mother of X) vs State of Maharashtra
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act 1971 protects registered medical practitioners and medical boards when they form opinions in good faith. Medical boards must not restrict themselves to the criteria under Section 3(2-B) of the MTP Act but must evaluate the physical and emotional well-being of the pregnant person. When issuing clarificatory opinions, medical boards must provide sound and cogent reasons for any change in opinion. The consent of a pregnant person in decisions of reproductive autonomy and termination of pregnancy is paramount. In case of divergence between a pregnant person and guardian's opinion, the pregnant person's view must be taken into consideration as an important aspect. The fundamental right to reproductive autonomy, dignity, and privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution must be given primacy by medical boards and courts, and delays caused by changing opinions or court procedures must not frustrate these fundamental rights.
On this section: Offenses relating to sexual assault of children; FIR was registered under these sections
-
A (mother of X) vs State of Maharashtra
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The welfare of a minor victim of sexual assault is of paramount importance and overrides the strict application of the 24-week limit prescribed in the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act 1971. When a minor becomes pregnant as a result of sexual assault and a comprehensive medical board opines that continuation of pregnancy would negatively impact her physical and mental well-being and that safe termination is medically feasible, the Supreme Court can exercise its constitutional powers under Article 142 to authorize medical termination of pregnancy beyond the statutory limit, with the State bearing all medical expenses and ensuring comprehensive care for the minor.
On this section: Cited to establish the statutory framework for protecting children from sexual offences and the criminal charges registered against the alleged perpetrator, reinforcing the status of the minor as a victim of crime.
-
Sahrudayan @ Swamy v. State of Kerala
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Final Order order-1.pdf 2022-06-07 DATE VERIFIED. Dr. Kauser Edappagath J. Crl.A. 1019/2019. Isolate: POCSO s.4 punishment for penetrative sexual assault read with s.3(d) — applying the mouth to the child’s penis (or making the child do so) is penetrative sexual assault; victim’s evidence plus ss.29/30 presumption sufficient; delay of one month in FIR explained because the child was six. Conviction and minimum sentence upheld. Leading HC. Distinctive name. Map 4 only — s.3 already filled; do not pad IPC 377.
On this section: POCSO s.4 punishes penetrative sexual assault; applying the mouth to a child’s penis is s.3(d) penetrative sexual assault attracting the s.4 sentence (Sahrudayan).
-
Xxx vs In Re- State of Assam
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a criminal offence is continuing in nature, initiated in one jurisdiction with consequences ensuing in that same jurisdiction, and parts of the offence (including the consequences) occur within that jurisdiction, the court having jurisdiction over that area where the offence was initiated and consequences ensued has the authority to conduct the trial, even if part of the criminal acts occurred in a different jurisdiction. This principle applies under Sections 178 and 179 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, and the trial court need not be changed merely because some acts constituting the offence occurred in a different territorial jurisdiction.
On this section: The offence charged in the underlying trial. Court noted that the trial was being conducted under this section along with Sections 312 and 313 IPC.
-
JITRAM ORAON vs STATE
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In POCSO matters, the hostility of a parent/informant is not a sufficient ground for bail if the child victim's own testimony and medical evidence provide a prima facie case of guilt.
On this section: Special provisions for aggravated penetrative sexual assault.
-
Chander Parkash vs State of Haryana
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When key prosecution witnesses in a serious criminal case have already been examined and have not supported the prosecution case, and the trial is stalled due to procedural reasons (such as medical leave of a medical expert), bail may be granted to the accused as there is no apprehension of witness tampering and continued detention serves no useful purpose, provided appropriate bail conditions are imposed to prevent tampering with evidence and ensure the accused's appearance in trial.
On this section: Punishment for penetrative sexual assault on a child - cited as one of the charges against the accused
-
Mohammed Yakub Abdul Rasheed vs The State of Maharashtra
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In cases involving serious allegations of sexual offenses against minor children under the POCSO Act, where at least one victim has made prima facie credible allegations of sexual assault or harassment, and the accused holds a position of trust and authority over the victims, anticipatory bail should be rejected despite exonerating statements from other victims, as the heinous nature of the allegations and the prima facie evidence against the accused outweigh the bail applicant's right to pre-arrest protection.
On this section: Penetrative sexual assault - alleged offense against minor girls
-
The State of Maharashtra vs Kisan Surwanshi
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the victim was a minor at the time of the alleged incident in cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. A school bonafide certificate, being a private document, must be properly proved through the concerned school authority and cannot be relied upon as sole evidence of age without corroborating documentary evidence such as a birth certificate. When the victim's own testimony and that of her parents contradict the prosecution's allegations of kidnapping and sexual assault, and when the victim testifies to a consensual relationship, the prosecution's case fails in the absence of independent corroborating evidence. The burden of proof lies entirely on the prosecution to establish each element of the charge beyond reasonable doubt.
On this section: Punishment for penetrative sexual assault - applicable only if victim is a child; court found age not proven
-
Moinul Haque vs The State of Assam
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When examining an application for pre-arrest bail under Section 438 CrPC in cases involving serious charges such as criminal intimidation and offences under the POSCO Act, the court must carefully consider the contents of the FIR and the materials in the case diary, including victim statements recorded under Section 164 CrPC. If such materials indicate the seriousness of the allegations and the credibility of the victim's account, the court may decline to grant pre-arrest bail.
On this section: Section 4 of the POSCO Act was cited as one of the charges, indicating allegations of a serious nature involving child protection.
-
Ballu @ Balram Kesharwani vs State of Chhattisgarh
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Bail may be refused in heinous offenses like gang rape and POCSO violations when there is credible evidence of the accused's identification supported by official witness testimony.
On this section: Aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a minor.
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 4
What have the courts held on Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act?
A (mother of X) vs State of Maharashtra (29 Apr 2024) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Offenses relating to sexual assault of children; FIR was registered under these sections. Another 9 judgments on this section are set out below, 2 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2016 to 2025.
How do I find court cases under Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: Pocso Act 4, section 4 Pocso Act, section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 10 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with A (mother of X) vs State of Maharashtra (29 Apr 2024).
What should I read with Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, and has it changed?
1 other provision in this corpus refers back to it.
When did Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act come into force?
Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, cited as Pocso Act 4, came into force on 14 Nov 2012, having been enacted on 19 Jun 2012. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 9. Aggravated sexual assault813 words
- 5. Aggravated penetrative sexual assault811 words
- 33. Procedure and powers of Special Court395 words
- 2. Definitions340 words
- 19. Reporting of offences338 words
- 45. Power to make rules323 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.