B. P. DESHPANDE
Subhash S/o. Dattu Nanu – Appellant
Versus
State of Goa – Respondent
JUDGMENT/ORDER
1. The appellant is challenging the judgment dtd. 3/5/2019 in Special Case No.58/2014 whereby the learned Children's Court, Panaji found appellant guilty for the offence punishable under Sec. 323 of I.P.C. and 8(2) of Goa Children's Act and accordingly sentenced for imprisonment and fine.
2. The appeal was admitted on 27/6/2019 and thereafter Records And Proceedings along with paper-book were called.
3. Heard Mr Arun De Sa, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr Gaurish Nagvenker, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents.
4. With the assistance of learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, I have perused records as well as findings in the impugned judgment.
5. The learned counsel Shri De Sa appearing for the appellant strongly contended that in the present matter prosecution has failed to prove that the accused/appellant was involved in any assault on the victim child so as to punish him for both the offences. In the alternative he submitted that even if he considered that there was some force used by the accused against the minor, it was not with intent to assault him but only to correct him for his mistake and to inform his teacher. He submi
The court established that actions taken in good faith to correct a child's misbehavior, without intent to harm, do not constitute child abuse under the Goa Children's Act or assault under the IPC.
Isolated physical assault on minor causing simple hurt qualifies under IPC 324 r/w 34 but not child abuse or IPC 504; conviction upheld for former, set aside for others; probation consideration manda....
The primary legal point established is that the quality of evidence, especially from injured witnesses, is paramount in criminal trials, affirming that such testimony holds significant weight over me....
Inconsistent testimony and delay in formal accusations led to acquittal; simply slapping does not equate to outraging modesty under law.
Section 7 of POCSO Act reads as whoever, with sexual intent touches vagina, penis, anus or breast of the child with sexual intent without penetration is said to commit sexual assault.
The court confirmed the conviction and the sentence of the Appellant under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, for committing aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a four-ye....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 354 IPC and Section 10 POCSO Act to convict the appellant for sexually assaulting a minor.
The burden of proof lies on the prosecution to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
The necessity of proving penetration or manipulation causing penetration for charges under the POCSO Act was emphasized, leading to a conviction for attempted offences.
Victim's credible testimony and unrebutted Section 29 POCSO presumption prove sexual assault; sentence modified for lack of aggravating evidence.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.