Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 · Chapter II: Sexual Offences against Children A.—Penetrative Sexual Assault and Punishment Therefor · B.—aggravated penetrative sexual assault and punishment therefor
Section 5: Aggravated penetrative sexual assault
(a) Whoever, being a police officer, commits penetrative sexual assault on a child —
(i) within the limits of the police station or premises at which he is appointed; or
(ii) in the premises of any station house, whether or not situated in the police station, to which he is appointed; or
(iii) in the course of his duties or otherwise; or
(iv) where he is known as, or identified as, a police officer; or
(b) whoever being a member of the armed forces or security forces commits penetrative sexual assault on a child—
(i) within the limits of the area to which the person is deployed; or
(ii) in any areas under the command of the forces or armed forces; or
(iii) in the course of his duties or otherwise; or
(iv) where the said person is known or identified as a member of the security or armed forces; or
(c) whoever being a public servant commits penetrative sexual assault on a child; or
(d) whoever being on the management or on the staff of a jail, remand home, protection home, observation home, or other place of custody or care and protection established by or under any law for the time being in force, commits penetrative sexual assault on a child, being inmate of such jail, remand home, protection home, observation home, or other place of custody or care and protection; or
(e) whoever being on the management or staff of a hospital, whether Government or private, commits penetrative sexual assault on a child in that hospital; or
(f) whoever being on the management or staff of an educational institution or religious institution, commits penetrative sexual assault on a child in that institution; or
(g) whoever commits gang penetrative sexual assault on a child.
Explanation.— When a child is subjected to sexual assault by one or more persons of a group in furtherance of their common intention, each of such persons shall be deemed to have committed gang penetrative sexual assault within the meaning of this clause and each of such person shall be liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone; or
(h) whoever commits penetrative sexual assault on a child using deadly weapons, fire, heated substance or corrosive substance; or
(i) whoever commits penetrative sexual assault causing grievous hurt or causing bodily harm and injury or injury to the sexual organs of the child; or
(j) whoever commits penetrative sexual assault on a child, which—
(i) physically incapacitates the child or causes the child to become mentally ill as defined under clause (l) of section 2 of the Mental Health Act, 1987 (14 of 1987) or causes impairment of any kind so as to render the child unable to perform regular tasks, temporarily or permanently; ***
(ii) in the case of female child, makes the child pregnant as a consequence of sexual assault;
(iii) inflicts the child with Human Immunodeficiency Virus or any other life threatening disease or Infection which may either temporarily or permanently impair the child by rendering him physically incapacitated, or mentally ill to perform regular tasks; ***
[(iv) causes death of the child; or]
(k) whoever, taking advantage of a child's mental or physical disability, commits penetrative sexual assault on the child; or
(l) whoever commits penetrative sexual assault on the child more than once or repeatedly; or
(m) whoever commits penetrative sexual assault on a child below twelve years; or
(n) whoever being a relative of the child through blood or adoption or marriage or guardianship or in foster care or having a domestic relationship with a parent of the child or who is living in the same or shared household with the child, commits penetrative sexual assault on such child; or
(o) whoever being, in the ownership, or management, or staff, of any institution providing services to the child, commits penetrative sexual assault on the child; or
(p) whoever being in a position of trust or authority of a child commits penetrative sexual assault on the child in an institution or home of the child or anywhere else; or
(q) whoever commits penetrative sexual assault on a child knowing the child is pregnant; or
(r) whoever commits penetrative sexual assault on a child and attempts to murder the child; or
(s) whoever commits penetrative sexual assault on a child in the course of [communal or sectarian violence or during any natural calamity or in similar situations]; or
(t) whoever commits penetrative sexual assault on a child and who has been previously convicted of having committed any offence under this Act or any sexual offence punishable under any other law for the time being in force; or
(u) whoever commits penetrative sexual assault on a child and makes the child to strip or parade naked in public, is said to commit aggravated penetrative sexual assault.
Source: India Code (indiacode.gov.in), the consolidated text published by the Legislative Department, Government of India. Text as updated on India Code on 14 October 2026. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here. Official text on India Code.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 5
-
Dashwanth v. State of Tamil Nadu
Trial Court found appellant guilty for the charges framed u/ss.302, 201, 363, 366 and 354-B of the IPC and s.8 r/w. s.7 and s.6 r/w. s.5(m) of the POCSO Act. An appeal against the said conviction was dismissed by the…
-
Akhtar Ali @ Ali Akhtar @ Shamim @ Raja Ustad v. State of Uttarakhand
Whether the conviction of the appellants, as recorded by the trial Court and affirmed by the High Court, deserves to be upheld or whether they are entitled to acquittal.
-
Jai Prakash v. State of Uttarakhand
Allegation against the appellant herein that he committed a forceful rape and strangulated a 10 year old girl child. The punishment handed down to the appellant by the Courts below was of death penalty. Whether the…
-
Waris v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Whether Trial Court ought to have given proper time and opportunity to the legal aid defence counsel to prepare the matter and should have deferred the cross-examination of PW-1 by a reasonable time so as to ensure…
-
Sachin v. State of Maharashtra
Issue arose whether, the High Court could enhance the sentence under its revisional powers in a convict’s appeal against conviction.
-
Gyanendra Singh @ Raja Singh v. State of U.P.
Whether the conviction of the appellant ought to have been recorded under the IPC or whether the provisions of the Special law, i.e., Section 42A of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, would prevail…
-
Karandeep Sharma @ Razia @ Raju v. State of Uttarakhand
In a case based on circumstantial evidence, whether the concurrent conviction of the appellant-accused for the kidnapping, rape/sexual assault and murder of a minor is sustainable.
- Raja Halder v. State NCT of Delhi
-
Sambhubhai Raisangbhai Padhiyar v. State of Gujarat
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order of conviction and death sentence to the appellant for offences punishable u/ss.302, 364 and 377 IPC and ss. 4 and 6 of the POCSO, for committing murder and brutal…
- State v. Chand Babu
- Vivek Goswami v. State (Gnct of Delhi) and Anr
-
Rabbu @ Sarvesh v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
The appellant was convicted for offences punishable u/ss. 450, 376(2)(i), 376D, 376A and 302 r/w. s.34 of IPC and s.5(g)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) awarding death penalty…
- Sajjad Alam v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr
- Sabib v. The State Govt of NCT of Delhi
-
IN RE: RIGHT TO PRIVACY OF ADOLESCENTS versus
(i) When a Court deals with an appeal against an order of conviction, what are the essentials, which a judgment must contain; (ii) What was the duty of the High Court while ascertaining the offences u/s.6 of the…
- Sundari Gautam v. State of NCT of Delhi
- State v. Tofil Ahmad @ Sonu Singh
- Abhishek Khan @ Monu v. The State Govt of Nct, Delhi & Anr
- Bharat Jaina v. State NCT of Delhi
- State v. Basant Mishra @ Suraj
-
Child in Conflict With Law Through His Mother v. The State of Karnataka and Another
(i) Whether the period provided for completion of preliminary assessment u/s. 14(3) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 is mandatory or directory; (ii) Whether the words ‘Children’s…
- Sushil Yadav v. State
- Ram Bahadur v. State (Nct of Delhi)
- Hukam Singh v. State
-
Bhaggi @ Bhagirath @ Naran v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
The capital punishment awarded to the petitioner-convict for the conviction u/s. 376 AB, IPC was not confirmed and it was commuted to imprisonment for life, which, going by the provisions thereunder, means imprisonment…
- Pradeep Kumar v. State
- State v. Liyakat Ali & Anr
- Vicky v. State of N.C.T. of Delhi
- Faiyaz @ Payazi v. State
- Ajeet Singh v. The State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr
- State Gnct of Delhi v. Suraj
- State of NCT of Delhi v. Dabloo Kumar @ Pandit
- Kalu @ Niyaz v. The State Gnct of Delhi
- Saurabh Tripathi v. State of NCT of Delhi
-
Bhagw An Singh v. Dilip Kumar @ Deepu @ Depak
Whether the Single Judge of the High Court was justified in granting bail to the respondent-accused in connection with the FIR registered against them by the appellant-uncle of the minor girl alleging gang rape, threat…
- Ranjeet Kumar Yadav v. State of NCT of Delhi
- Shashim Das v. State of NCT of Delhi and Anr
- State of U.P. v. Sonu Kushwaha
- Babu Lal Bhawariya v. State of NCT of Delhi
- Deepak Kumar v. State NCT of Delhi
- Satish Kumar Kashyap @ Sagar v. State
- Karan @ Fatiya v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
- Sudhir Sahni v. State
- Rohit Srivastava v. State of NCT of Delhi and Anr
- Akhilesh Arya v. State
- Manendra Prasad Tiwari v. Amit Kumar Tiwari & Anr.
- Veerendra v. State of Madhya Pradesh
- Mohd. Firoz v. State of Madhya Pradesh
- Ms.Y v. State of Rajasthan and Anr.
- Pappu v. The State of Uttar Pradesh
- Nawabuddin v. State of Uttarakhand
- Shatrughna Baban Meshram v. State of Maharashtra
- Anokhilal v. State of Madhya Pradesh
- Mani Pushpak Joshi v. State of Uttarakhand & Anr.
- Manoharan v. State by Inspector of Police, Variety Hall Police Station, Coimbatore
- Kumar Ghimirey v. The State of Sikkim
- Dattatraya @ Datta Ambo Rokade v. The State of Maharashtra
- Nand Kishore v. State of Madhya Pradesh
- Madan Mohan v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
- Independent Thought v. Union of India & Anr.
- Ms. Eera Through Dr. Manjula Krippendorf v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.