The judgment emphasizes the importance of conclusive evidence in age determination and highlights the margin of error in such determinations, while also providing a detailed analysis of the legal provisions under the Indian Penal Code, Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, and Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

ORDER :

R.G. Avachat, J.

1. This appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 22 March, 2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Parbhani in Special Case (POCSO) No. 24 of 2015. By the impugned judgment and order, the appellants herein have been convicted for the offences punishable under Indian Penal Code ("I.P.C." for short), Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 ("PITA" for short) and Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ("POCSO" for short) and sentenced to suffer imprisonment and to pay fine. For the sake of convenience, details of the offences for which the appellants have been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment are given in a tabular form below:-

The appellants along with six others were prosecuted for the offences stated hereinabove and with some other offences of which they have been acquitted. The State has not preferred appeal against acquittal.

2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are as follows:-

P.W. 1 - Vivek (informant) was Inspector of Police attached with Local Crime Branch, Parbhani. He received tip-off that Appellant No. 1 -Sonabai ("A-1" for short) runs a brothel at Manwat. Minor girls were brought from Rajasthan and forced into prostitution at the brothel run by A-1. P.W. 1 - Vivek, therefore, made all the arrangements for effecting a raid at the brothel. P.W. 18 - Vikas agreed to act as dummy customer. Services of other two persons were availed to act as panch witnesses. First a pre-trap panchanama (Exh. 35) was prepared. Currency note of Rs. 500/- bearing a particular number was given to P.W. 18 -Vikas so as to offer it to A-1 in consideration for providing by her a prostitute. As planned, P.W. 18 - Vikas went to the premises of A-1. He offered her sum of Rs. 500/- and asked for a minor girl. A-1, in turn, showed him three girls. He selected one of them. He then paid A-1 the earmarked currency note of Rs. 500/-. P.W. 18 - Vikas then took the selected girl -Anita (name changed) to one of the rooms in the said premises/wada. As planned, he gave a missed-call to P.W. 1 - Vivek. Thereupon, P.W. I - Vivek accompanied by a few police officials and two panchas entered the premises/wada. He seized the earmarked currency note of Rs. 500/- and Rs. 13,000/- from A-1 and prepared panchnama of seizure of the currency notes (Exh. 41). It was found that there were fourteen girls made to work as prostitutes. Twelve of them seemed to be minors. P.W. 1 - Vivek took all of them to Manwat Police Station. He then lodged F.I.R. bearing C.R. No. 33 of 2015 for the offences punishable under Sections 366-A, 370, 370-A, 372 and 373 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C., under Sections 3, 4, 5, 5(a), 5(b), 6 and 7(1)(a)(2) of PITA. P.W. 19 - Dadahari, Inspector of Police, Manwat Police Station did the investigation of crime. He visited the brothel, prepared scene of offence panchanama, recorded statements of the girls rescued from the brothel and got all of them medically examined. On completion of investigation, the appellants and six others were proceeded against by filing charge-sheet before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Manwat. Learned J.M.F.C., Manwat, in turn, committed the case to the Court of Session. The case was assigned to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge ("trial Court") for trial in accordance with law. Charge (Exh. 24) was framed. Then it was realised that offences punishable under POCSO Act were attrac