LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/satauram-mandavi-vs-the-state-of-chhattisgarh-anr-20250725/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Criminal · Reportable judgment

Satauram Mandavi vs The State of Chhattisgarh & Anr.

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
25 July 2025
Case No.
Criminal Appeal No. 3179 of 2025
Result
Partly allowed
Bench
Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta
Citation
[2025] 7 S.C.R. 1538 : 2025 INSC 892
Acts & Sections
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences… Protection of Children from Sexual Offences… Constitution IPC
Supreme Court Reports [2025] 7 S.C.R. 1538 : 2025 INSC 892
Issue for consideration
Matter pertains to the retrospective application of the amended provision-s.6 POCSO Act, to the incident which took place prior to the amendment.
Headnote

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – s.6 (as amended) – Punishment for aggravated penetrative sexual assault – Retrospective application of the amended provision-s.6, to the incident took place prior to the amendment – Propriety – Commission of offence by the appellant on 20.05.2019 – Amended provision of s.6 POCSO Act, came into force on 16.08.2019 whereby the minimum sentence enhanced to 20 years and redefined “imprisonment for life” to mean imprisonment for the remainder of the natural life – Courts below convicted the appellant u/s.376AB IPC and s.6 POCSO Act and sentenced him to imprisonment for remainder of his natural life, along with a fine – Correctness: Held: Constitutional bar against retrospective imposition of a harsher penalty u/Art.20(1) is clear and absolute – Since the offence was committed on 20.05.2019, the amended provision of s.6 POCSO Act, which came into force on 16.08.2019, could not have been applied to the instant case – Trial court, in applying the enhanced sentence introduced by the 2019 Amendment to s.6 POCSO Act, effectively subjected the appellant to a punishment greater than that which was permissible under the law in force at the time of commission of the offence which is clearly violative of the bar contained in Art.20(1) – Sentence of “imprisonment for life, meaning remainder of natural life,” as per the amended provision, did not exist on the date of the incident – Under the unamended s.6, the maximum punishment permissible was imprisonment for life in its conventional sense and not imprisonment till the remainder of natural life – Conviction of the appellant u/s.6 POCSO Act upheld, however, sentence is modified to that of rigorous imprisonment for life, as given under the unamended statute, and set aside the sentence of imprisonment for the remainder of the natural life – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act, 2019 – Constitution of India – Art.20(1) – Penal Code, 1860 – s.376AB. [Paras 9-13]

Keywords: Retrospective application of the amended provision-s.6 POCSO Act · Life imprisonment for remainder of his natural life · Constitutional bar · Punishment greater than which was permissible under the law in force at the time of commission of the offence · Imprisonment for life · Rigorous imprisonment for life

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Nidhi Jain. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

Judgment Vikram Nath, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. The present appeal arises from the judgment dated 05.09.2023 passed by the High Court of Chhattisgarh, whereby the appellant’s appeal challenging the judgment of conviction dated 30.11.2021 rendered by the Trial Court was dismissed. By the said judgment, the appellant was convicted under Section 376AB of the Indian Penal Code, 18601 and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 20122 and sentenced to imprisonment for life, meaning imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life, along with a fine of ₹10,000/-. 3. The
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All SC judgments →