The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on victim testimony, medical evidence, and school records to establish guilt in sexual offence cases. The judgment also emphasizes the consideration of circumstances in determining the quantum of sentence.

JUDGMENT

Sarang V. Kotwal, J. - Both these appeals are decided by this common Judgment because they arise from the same case and in both these appeals the same Judgment and Order is challenged.

2. In this Judgment, both the appellants are referred to by their original status in the trial court.

3. The appellant Husain Mustak Choudhary in Criminal appeal No.853 of 2019 was the accused No.1 and appellant Mohd. Hanif ahmad Shaikh in Criminal appeal No. 1539 of 2018 was the accuse No.2 in POCSO Special Case No. 363 of 2014. at the conclusion of the trial the learned Judge of designated court under The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences act, 2012 (for short 'POCSO'), for Greater Bombay, vide her Judgment and order dated 29/09/2017 convicted both the appellants. The accused No.1 was convicted for the offences punishable under sections 363, 376(2)(n) and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC'), as well as, under section 6 of the POCSO. He was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 20 (twenty) years and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo R.I. for further six months.

4. The accused No.2 was convicted for commission of offences punishable under sections 354, 376(2)(f) and 506(II) of IPC, as well as, under section 6 of the POCSO. He was sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.50000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo R.I. for further six months. Out of the fine amount, Rs.80,000/- were directed to be paid to the victim. The District Legal aid Services authority was recommended to pay adequate compensation to the victim as per amended Section 357-a, Sub Clause (1) of Cr.P.C. The benefit of set off under section 428 of the Cr.p.c. was extended to both the accused.

5. Heard Shri. aniket Vagal, learned counsel for both the accused and Shri. amit Palkar, learned aPP for the State.

6. The prosecution case has unfolded through the evidence of the victim and that of her mother. In short, the prosecution case was that, in October 2013 the victim who was around 15 years of age; left her house. The accused No.1 saw her crying. She was alone. He took her with him to his house. She stayed there for about seven months. In the meantime, he had sexual intercourse with her on multiple occasions, because of which, she became pregnant. She then contacted her mother and came back home.

Then she lodged her complaint. at the time of lodging of her F.I.R. she also made allegations against the accused No.2 who was her father. according to her, when she was residing with her parents, the accused No.2 took advantage of her vulnerable position and committed rape on a few occasions. When the investigation was carried out, both the accused were arrested, the charge-sheet was filed. They faced the trial.

7. The prosecution examined 11 witnesses in support of its case. PW-1 was mother of the victim, PW-5 is victim herself, PW-6 Dr. amruta Jain, PW-7 Dr. Nikita Bhot, PW-8 Dr. Minal Sarmalkar, PW-10 is Dr. Rajesh Dhere were the Medical Oficers conducting medical procedures. PW-9 aPI Wagh was the Investigating officer and PW-11 was the School teacher who produced school record showing date of birth of the victim as 15/08/1998. PW-2 Riyaz Shaikh was a panch for spot panchanama. PW-3 Mahendra Kamble was a panch for another spot panchanama.

8. The accused No.1 examined his mother as the defence witness. The defence of the accused No.1 was of total denial. The accused No.2 took up a specific defence in his statement recorded under section 313 of the Cr.p.c. that the victim was holding grudge against him as he used to scold her for not studying. She was in love with a boy named Yasin and accused No.2 was opposing that. On these two counts he was falsely implicated by his daughter.

9. after considering the evidence on record and the arguments, learned Judge was pleased to convict and sentence both the accused, as mentioned earlier.

10. PW-1 was the mother of the victim and wife of the acc