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

2018 Supreme(Bom) 724

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.
Pravin @ Shrikrishna Chandrakant Marathe – Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra – Respondent
Criminal Revision Application No.203 of 2000
Decided On : 04-06-2018

Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicant : Mr. A.S. Khandeparkar with Mr. Apoorva A. Khandeparkar and
Mr. Rajdeep D. Gude
For the Respondent: Ms. R.M. Gadhvi, APP.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code,1860 - Sections 376, 451 and 506 - Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 - Section 2(h) - Inquiry - Punishment - Parents and sisters made inquiries with her in that regard but due to fear she did not disclose anything to them mother of victim took her to doctor who opined on examination that she was pregnant for about seven months- Thereafter on inquiry by parents victim told them that she was pregnant from accused- father of victim secured presence of some persons from locality and he informed them that accused is responsible for pregnancy of victim- All of them went to house of accused- Before them accused admitted that he had sexual intercourse with victim- All of them asked accused to perform marriage with victim but accused and his father declined to do so- On next day festival father of victim called a meeting at his house and even at that time accused refused to perform marriage with victim- On information was received that accused was about to abscond from village and thereafter father of victim with help of villagers took accused to police station – Held, Case may be for obtaining credit worthy evidence about age- Magistrate may as well call upon accused also to lead evidence about his age- Thereafter learned Magistrate may proceed in accordance with law- This procedure if properly followed would avoid a journey up to Apex Court and return journey to grassroot Court- If necessary and found expedient High Court may on its administrative side issue necessary instructions to cope with situation herein indicated Appellate Court also to direct an inquiry with regards to juvenility of applicant- On basis of report submitted by Court pursuant to directions of this Court it is crystal clear that applicant was juvenile at time of occurrence of incident- report submitted by Court upon inquiry is analytical and a conscious effort is made by Court to consider evidence on record and record finding that at time of occurrence of offence applicant was below of age- said report deserves to be accepted- In Ram’s case reference is made to decision of Supreme Court in Chandra wherein it was held that when a claim of juvenility is raised and on evidence available two views are possible Court should lean in favour of holding offender to be a juvenile in border line cases- In light of decisions referred to hereinabove more particularly in Bharat case (supra) provisions of Juvenile Justice (as amended) are applicable to case of applicant- It is also apparent that appellant has crossed age of 18 years and in light of observations in several decisions applicant cannot be referred to juvenile justice board- Although conviction of applicant is upheld sentence imposed upon applicant is required to be set aside in accordance with provisions of Juvenile Justice Act and in accordance with ratio laid down in judicial pronouncements referred to hereinabove - Appeal allowed

JUDGMENT :

1. The applicant was charged with offences punishable under Sections 376, 451 and 506 of Indian Penal Code (‘IPC’). The applicant was tried before the Court of Assistant Sessions Judge, Sindhudurg, at Oros vide Sessions Case No.27 of 1997.

2. The facts of the prosecution case, in brief, are as under :

(a) Kumari Sangita Gunaji Khandare (hereinafter referred to as the ‘victim’) is the resident of Ranbambuli-Kavalewadi. She was taking education in 7th standard in Primary Marathi School, at Ranbambuli. The date of birth of the victim is 25th July 1981. Her family consists of parents, brother and two sisters. The accused is also resident of Kavalewadi;

(b) Some time in March-1996, at about 11.00 a.m., the victim was present in her house. She was alone. Her family members had gone out to attend their work. The accused came to the house of the victim and embraced her saying that he loves her and intends to marry her. He made her fall down and committed intercourse with the victim. He left the house of victim with a promise that he would marry the victim and threatened her not to disclose the incident to anyone else;

(c) After about four to five days of the said incident, when the victim was alone in the house, the accused again visited the victim. He forcibly dragged the victim to adjoining room in the house. He committed intercourse with her. While leaving the house, he threatened her not to disclose the incident to anyone else or else she will be killed;

(d) Thereafter the accused visited the house of the victim on several occasions but the other family members were present in the house and therefore, he could not commit any such act but kept on promising that he will marry the victim and told her not to tell the incidents to anyone else;

(e) The victim was pregnant for about seven months and her stomach was enlarged. So her parents and sisters made inquiries with her in that regard, but due to fear, she did not disclose anything to them. The mother of victim took her to doctor, who opined on examination that she was pregnant for about seven months. Thereafter on inquiry by parents, the victim told them that she was pregnant from accused. The father of victim secured presence of some persons from locality and he informed them that the accused is responsible for pregnancy of the victim. All of them went to the house of accused. Before them, the accused admitted that he had sexual intercourse with the victim. All of them asked the accused to perform marriage with the victim, but the accused and his father declined to do so. On the next day of Ganesh Chaturthi festival, the father of victim called a meeting at his house and even at that time, the accused refused to perform marriage with the victim. On 19th September 1996, information was received that the accused was about to abscond from village and thereafter the father of victim with the help of villagers took the accused to police station;

(f) On 19th September 1996, the victim lodged first information report about the incident. On the basis of first information report, offence came to be registered against the accused under Sections 376, 451 and 506 of IPC. Mr. Panchal, Police Sub Inspector of Oros Police Station took over the charge of investigation of the case. On 20th September 1996, a panchanama of scene of offence was drawn. The complainant was referred to Civil Hospital, Sawantwadi. Dr. Marathe and Dr. Tidke both examined the complainant and found that she was pregnant and issued requisite medical certificate. The complainant victim was admitted to the hospital, where she gave birth to a male child on 23rd October 1996. On 20th September 1996, the accused was arrested;

(g) During the course of investigation statements of witnesses were recorded. The documents like C.A. certificates and the certificate issued by the Headmaster, Primary Marathi School, Ranbambuli, were collected. The charge sheet was filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kudal. Since offe





























































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