SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2015 Supreme(Bom) 788

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT AURANGABAD
S.S. SHINDE, A.M. BADAR, JJ.
Prakash @ Jaywant Wasudeo Wankhede & Another - Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Another - Respondents
Criminal Appeal Nos. 117 of 2012, 142 & 540 of 2012
Decided On : 08-05-2015

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellantd:R.S. Deshmukh, Advocate.
For the Respondents:R1, R.N. Dhorde, Senior Advocate, along with Pravin G. Patil, i/b V.R. Dhorde, Advocates, S.G. Karlekar, APP.

Headnote:[INDIAN] PENAL CODE, 1860 - Sections 376, 511 and 506 Attempt to rape and criminal intimidation Proof of. Where prosecution proved it case beyond reasonable doubt that accused maternal grand father of victim committed sexual abuse of victim minor girl more than one time and medical evidence also corroborated statement of prosecutrix, conviction and sentence of accused person under Section 376, 506 and 511 was upheld. Scrutiny of evidence of prosecution thus makes it clear that minor victim has disclosed the alleged incident of sexual assault on her, to her father as well as to the several witnesses examined by the prosecution including medical witnesses and the Police Officer. Narrating of the incident by the minor girl PW 110 to PW 4 and PW 5 was on 29.6.2009 i.e. much before returning of her mother Sonali to her matrimonial home at Bandra on 22.7.2009. All the prosecution witnesses have deposed about the detail narration of the incident by the victim girl that, there was sexual abuse by the accused on more than one occasion.

       The judgment and order passed by the trial Court and the sentence awarded deserves to be confirmed. Accordingly same stands confirmed. Appeal filed by the appellant-accused stands dismissed, so also appeal filed by the State as well as complainant also stands dismissed.

       [INDIAN] PENAL CODE, 1860 - Sections 376 and 571 Evidence Act, 1872 Constitution of India, Article 21 Attempt to rape. In the case of sexual offence, evidence of prosecutrix a minor girl would be regarded as reliable and there is no need of corroboration to it if it appears to be credible. It is well-settled that the Court should examine broader probabilities of the case and not get swayed by minor contractions or insignificant discrepancies in evidence of witnesses. It is well-settled that if the evidence of prosecutrix inspires confidence, then it can be relied upon without seeking further corroboration to victim’s statement, and if for some reason the Court finds it difficult to place implicit reliance on such testimony of the prosecutrix, it may look at other evidence.

       The very nature of offence in such cases, makes it difficult to get direct corroborative evidence. The victim of sexual offence is at a higher pedestal than the injured witnesses because she is subjected to physical, psychological as well as emotional injury. Such offence is a crime against the entire society and it violates the victim’s most cherished fundamental right i.e. right to life contained in Article 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950.

Judgment :-

S.S. Shinde, J.

1. Criminal Appeal No. 117/2012 is filed by the Appellant - original accused, challenging the Judgment and Order dated 18.02.2012 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule in Sessions Case No. 160/2010, thereby convicting the appellant for the offence punishable under section 376 r.w. Section 511 and Section 506 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for 5 Years and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to suffer R.I. for six months and further to suffer R.I. for one Year and to pay fine of Rs.500/- in default to suffer further R.I. for three months for the offence punishable under Section 376 r.w. Section 511 and Section 506 of IPC respectively. Criminal Appeal No. 142 of 2012 is filed by the original complainant, challenging the Judgment and Order dated 18.02.2012 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule in Sessions Case No. 160/2010, thereby acquitting the accused for the offence punishable under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code and Criminal Appeal No.540 of 2012 is filed by the Appellant – State, challenging the Judgment and order dated 18.02.2012 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule in Sessions Case No.160/2010, thereby acquitting the accused for the offence punishable under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case as emerged from the investigation, and further from the trial Court record, in brief, is as under:

2. One Manoj Suresh Deore is employed as a Clerk in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, Mumbai and was residing in Government Quarter at Bandra along with his wife Sonali and 6 Year old daughter, who is the victim in this case. The accused happens to be a real father in law of Manoj Deore and resides at Sakri, District Dhule.

3. The prosecution case is that, on 20.04.2009, the marriage of son of accused namely; Kamlesh was to be performed, and therefore, Sonali and her daughter [who is hereinafter referred to as the victim] had come to the house of accused on 15.04.2009 to attend the marriage ceremony of Kamlesh. They stayed at the house of accused till 03.05.2009. During that period, it is alleged that, the accused used to take the victim in his room in the night to make her sleep with him. He used to sleep with victim and in the night hours, he used to cover her face with a sheet, remove her under garment, insert his finger in her private part, apply his semen on that part and smell of it. He used to sit on her thighs like horse riding and insert his penis in her private part. He used to threaten her not to disclose this fact to anybody, else he would hang her to the fan and kill her. This episode recurred till the victim stayed at his house. Due to such conduct of the accused, and the threats given by him she was afraid of him and had suffered tremendous mental trauma. She did not disclose this fact to anyone. On 03.05.2009, she returned along with her mother to Nashik where her father Manoj Deore owns a house. The mother of Manoj Deore was present in the house at Nashik. Due to the sexual acts committed by accused with her, and threats given by him, the victim was under the mental shock. As a result, she abruptly used to get up from the sleep with bounds of cry. Looking to this abnormal behaviour of the victim, her grand mother asked her about her abnormal behaviour, but initially the victim did not tell anything. Her grand mother taking her in to confidence repeatedly inquired with her, where upon she narrated the entire incident to her grand mother.

4. It is further the case of the prosecution that, after the victim disclosed her grand mother about the incident, her grand mother immediately contacted her son Manoj Deore, who was at Mumbai and informed him on 07.06.2009 by telephonic message. He came to his house at Nashik where he was informed by his mother about the incident in detail. He returned to Mumbai along with his mother and victim on 01.06.2009. The victim was in a frightened state and therefore, he did not insist upon her to









































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top