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

2022 Supreme(Bom) 531

VINAY JOSHI
Vikas Shantaram Shinde – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Amit Mane, adv
For the Respondent: Mr. Suraj S. Hulke, Ms. Grishma Lad, adv

JUDGMENT :

Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and order of conviction dated 9th October, 2019 passed in Special Case No.4 of 2018 whereby the Appellant was held guilty for the offence under Sections 376(2)(i)(j)(n) and 506 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and under Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act). The Trial Court has imposed sentence to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.20,000/- with default clause, for the offence punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act. No separate punishment was awarded for the offence of rape by virtue of Section 42 of the POCSO Act. For the offence punishable under Section 506 of the IPC, accused was sentenced to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for 1 year along with fine of Rs.5,000. The Trial Court directed that both the sentences shall run concurrently.

2. The accused was in jail during the trial as well as during pendency of this appeal.

3. The prosecution case can be stated in brief that the victim-girl aged 13 years 8 months, was a school going intellectually disabled child of informant lady. The victim-girl missed her menstrual cycle somewhere in the month of June, 2

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top