In Brief
A father was convicted of raping his 9-year-old daughter and sentenced to life imprisonment. He appealed, arguing that since the POCSO Act and IPC both punished his act, only the POCSO Act should apply. The Supreme Court held that when both laws apply, the law providing greater punishment governs (here, the IPC). It affirmed conviction under both laws but clarified that the High Court improperly increased the sentence's rigour by stipulating it meant imprisonment for natural life without remission. The Court imposed life imprisonment without that requirement, alongside a ₹5 lakh fine payable to the victim, allowing the appeal in part on sentencing grounds only.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.