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

2024 Supreme(Bom) 211

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH
ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.
Ganpati Shankar Kage - Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra, Through Murum Police Station, Osmanabad & Ors. - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 179 of 2023
Decided On : 29-02-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Ms. Ranjana D. Reddy.
For the Respondents: Mr. N.D. Batule, A.P.P., Mr. Kailash Vitthal Pawar.

IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established is that in cases of sexual offences, the victim's testimony can be relied upon without corroboration if found to be credible and reliable. The absence of visible injuries does not necessarily negate the occurrence of rape, especially when the perpetrator is a family member.

Headnote:

POCSO - Conviction of appellant under Sections 376, 323, 504, 506 and under Sections 4, 6, 8, 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act - 376, 323, 504, 506, 4, 6, 8, 12

Fact of the Case:

The victim, a 15-year-old girl, accused her father of raping her under the influence of alcohol. The father was convicted by the trial court, and the appeal was filed against this conviction.

Finding of the Court:

The court re-examined the evidence, including the victim's testimony, medical evidence, and witness statements. The court found the victim's testimony to be credible and reliable, and the medical evidence did not negate the rape. The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the father's conviction.

Issues: The issues revolved around the credibility of the victim's testimony, the presence of medical evidence supporting the rape allegation, and the possibility of false implication.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that in cases of sexual offences, corroboration of the victim's testimony is not always necessary, especially when the victim's account is found to be reliable. The court also highlighted that the absence of visible injuries does not negate the occurrence of rape, especially in cases involving familial perpetrators.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the father's conviction under the POCSO Act was upheld.

JUDGMENT :

1. Judgment and order dated 30-11-2022 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Omerga in Special Case No.18 of 2021 convicting appellant for offence under Sections 376, 323, 504, 506 and under Sections 4, 6, 8, 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, is taken exception to by the convict by filing instant appeal.

FACTS IN BRIEF LEADING TO TRIAL

2. Victim, aged 15 years, studying in 9th Standard, lodged report on 29-04-2021 at Murum Police Station, Tq.Omerga, alleging that in the night of 28-04-2021 her father, under influence of liquor, called her in the room, threatening to kill her by use of axe, disrobed her and forced himself on her. She immediately rushed out and reached her uncle’s place and there she informed her grandparents and on the next day, she and her uncle went to Police Station and lodged report, on the strength of which, crime bearing no.93 of 2021 was registered. Investigation was carried out by PW9 Kawade, who after completion of investigation, chargesheeted accused and was tried before Additional Sessions Judge, Omerga and finally held guilty by judgment and order dated 30-11-2022 holding appellant guilty for above offences, hence the appeal.

SUBMISSIONS

On behalf of appellant :

3. Learned Counsel for the appellant pointed out that there is false implication. That testimony of victim does not inspire confidence. That because of strained relations with mother, victim has been made to lodge false FIR and even tutored to depose falsely. According to learned Counsel for the appellant, even age of victim has not been conclusively proved. That even medical evidence is not conclusive about rape as Doctor himself admitted that he is not sure about the opinion. It is pointed out that, according to the complainant, only she and her brother were in the house, however, her brother was not examined and only evidence of victim has been adduced. Therefore, learned trial Court ought not to have accepted the sole testimony of victim and in absence of medical evidence, further ought not to have been recorded guilt. That there is improper appreciation of evidence and law and hence, she seeks indulgence at the hands of this Court by allowing the appeal.

On behalf of State :

4. Learned APP pointed out that prosecution had established its case by examining as many as ten witnesses. That sole testimony of victim itself is inspiring confidence. That date of birth of victim has come on record. That she is proved to be a minor. That accused is very father of victim and therefore, there is no reason for false implication. That medical evidence is positive. According to learned APP, testimony of PW7 Sadnyanbai and PW8 Rajiya is lending support to the testimony of victim. That they are also star witnesses like victim. Further learned APP pointed out that while recording statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, there is virtually admission by accused and therefore, with such quality of evidence, he submits that findings of the learned trial Court cannot be faulted and he prays to dismiss the appeal.

On behalf of victim :

5. Learned Counsel for the victim also took objection to the appeal pointing out that victim is of 15 years of age. That accused raped his own daughter after consuming liquor and threatening her. That medical evidence supports victim’s testimony. That she is shown to be a minor. That there is overwhelming evidence and therefore, learned trial Court committed no error whatsoever in holding accused guilty and he too prays to dismiss the appeal for wants of merits.

6. This Court, being first appellate Court and last fact finding Court is expected to re-appreciate, re-analyze and re-examine the entire oral and documentary evidence adduced by prosecution.

7. In support of its case, prosecution has adduced evidence of as many as ten witnesses. Their status and role is as under :

    PROSECUTION WITNESSES

PW1 Dr. Basavraj Sidramppa Danaie is the Medical Officer, who examined vi

            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