Jharkhand High Court Says POCSO and IPC Punishments for Same Act Cannot Run Consecutively

The Jharkhand High Court held that Section 42 of the POCSO Act requires the greater applicable punishment when the same criminal act attracts both POCSO and IPC offences.

Background and legal issue

The appellant had received separate ten-year sentences under Section 4 of the POCSO Act and Section 376(2)(f) IPC, ordered to run consecutively. In appeal he did not dispute the conviction, but challenged the cumulative sentence.

Court's reasoning and legal position

Justices Ananda Sen and Pradeep Kumar Srivastava explained that the statutory overlap provision prevents stacking punishments for the same offence in that manner. The State also accepted that the consecutive direction was unsustainable.

Operative effect and next step

The Court corrected the sentencing approach. The decision concerns punishment for overlapping convictions, not an acquittal or a general rule against sentences for legally distinct offences.