1. Supreme Court of India AIR2022SC13

    Attorney General of India and Ors. v. Satish and Ors.

    While sexual intent under S. 8 POCSO is a question of fact, the Court is entitled to raise the presumption under S. 30 POCSO with regard to the culpable state of mind of the accused when the court is satisfied with the existence of a fact beyond reasonable doubt.

  2. Supreme Court of India Criminal Appeal Nos. 1097-1098 of 2018

    Pappu v. State of Uttar Pradesh

    Where foundational facts have been established, the presumption under section 29 POCSO becomes operational and the accused is bound to rebut the presumption.

    Pincites  Para 32; Page 39 & 40. Read case : Pappu v. State of Uttar Pradesh
  3. High Court of Tripura at Agartala Crl. A (J) 34 of 2019

    Lalmalsom Kaipeng v. The State of Tripura

    The duty to rebut the presumption under Section 29 POCSO arising only after the prosecution has succeeded in establishing the foundational facts.The burden to rebut the presumption can be discharged by the accused through effective cross-examination, or by adducing defence evidence or by the accused himself tendering oral evidence. The presumption and the duty to…

    Pincites  Para 27-33; Page 5, 6 & 7 Read case : Lalmalsom Kaipeng v. The State of Tripura