IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
G. A. SANAP, J.
Mahadeo @ Mahadya Uttam Gonde – Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 258 of 2022
Decided on : 04-09-2024
Sexual Offences - POCSO Act - Sections 4, 10; IPC - Section 377 - The court interpreted the provisions of the POCSO Act and IPC, emphasizing the necessity of proving penetration for certain charges, ultimately leading to a conviction for attempted offences rather than completed sexual assault.
Fact of the Case:
The victim, an 11-year-old boy, was lured by the accused to a field where he was overpowered and subjected to sexual assault. The victim reported the incident to his mother, leading to the accused's arrest and subsequent trial.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that while the incident occurred, the evidence did not sufficiently prove penetrative sexual assault as defined under the POCSO Act, leading to a conviction for attempted offences instead.
Issues: Whether the accused committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim and whether the evidence was sufficient to support the charges under the POCSO Act and IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that for a charge of penetrative sexual assault under the POCSO Act, evidence of actual penetration or manipulation causing penetration must be established, which was not sufficiently proven in this case.
Result: The appeal was partly allowed; conviction under Section 4 of the POCSO Act was quashed, while conviction under Section 10 of the POCSO Act and Section 377 read with Section 511 of IPC was maintained.
JUDGMENT :
In this appeal, challenge is to the judgment and order dated 28.03.2022, passed by the learned Special Judge, Special Court (POCSO), Chandrapur, whereby the learned Judge held the accused guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 4 and 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, “POCSO Act”) and under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “IPC”). He has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- and in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 4 of the POCSO Act, and rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 10 of the POCSO Act. No separate sentence has been awarded for the offence punishable under Section 377 of the IPC.
2] BACKGROUND FACTS:
PW-2 is the victim boy. On his report, a crime was registered against the accused at Gadchandur Police Station, Dist. Chandrapur. The case of prosecution, which can be gathered from the report and other materials, is that, on the date of the incident, the victim was 11 years old. The victim and the accused are the residents of village Nimani, Tah. Korpana, Dist. Chandrapur. On the date of the incident, the victim was studying in 5th Standard. On the date of the incident, the victim and his friend had gone to the field for grazing their goats. They were grazing their goats in the field of one Natthu Mama. The field of the accused is near to the field of Natthu Mama. The accused came to the said field on his motorcycle. The accused told the victim and his friend Ayush that there is a crop of green grams in his field. The accused lured them to accompany him. On the promise of giving them green grams, the victim and his friend Ayush accompanied the accused on his motorcycle to his field. After reaching his field, they got down from the motorcycle. At that time, the accused tried to catch hold of them. They ran away towards the road; however, the accused managed to catch hold and overpower the victim.
3] It is stated that Ayush ran away from the spot towards the road. The accused overpowered the victim and carried him on his shoulder in his field by the side of the bullock-cart road. The accused removed the pant of the victim. The accused also removed his pant. The accused pressed the scrotum and penis of the victim. The accused tore his shirt and threw it away. The accused pressed his chest. The accused forcefully laid him on the ground. He inserted his penis into his anus. At that time, they heard the horn of the vehicle. The accused released him and pushed him into the thorny bushes. The victim sustained injury to his hand. He put on his pant and shirt and went towards the road. His friend Ayush met him on the road. He narrated the incident to Ayush. They went home. The victim narrated the incident to his mother. The mother of the victim called one Praful Gourkar, an acquaintance of them. They went to the police station and lodged the report. On the basis of this report, a Crime bearing No.111/2020 was registered against the accused at Gadchandur Police Station.
4] PW-8 carried out the investigation. He forwarded the victim to the hospital for his medical examination. He drew the spot panchanama. He arrested the accused. He seized the cloths of the victim and the cloths of the accused. He forwarded the cloths and samples to F.S.L., Nagpur. He recorded the statements of the witnesses. On completion of the investigation, he filed the charge- sheet against the accused.
5] The learned Special Judge framed the charge against the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty. His defence is of false implication on account of his enmity with Umesh Rajurkar, who, at the time of the incident, was Up-Sarpach. Umesh Rajurkar is the friend of Praful Gourkar. Praful Gourkar demanded money from the mother of the victim. The
The necessity of proving penetration or manipulation causing penetration for charges under the POCSO Act was emphasized, leading to a conviction for attempted offences.
The court established that in cases of sexual assault, the victim's testimony can be sufficient for conviction, and that slight penetration constitutes an offense under the POCSO Act, regardless of t....
The judgment established the distinction between rape and sexual assault, emphasizing the requirement of penetration for the former, and the physical contact without penetration for the latter under ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of the provisions of the POCSO Act, specifically Section 7 read with Section 8, in determining the guilt of the ....
The absence of penetration is critical for a conviction under Sections 5(i) and 6 of the POCSO Act, but the presence of injuries can still lead to a conviction for aggravated sexual assault under Sec....
The court established that the definitions of sexual assault under the POCSO Act and rape under the IPC are closely aligned, and the presumption of guilt under the POCSO Act places a significant burd....
The reliability of the prosecutrix's testimony and the admissibility of res gestae evidence were central to the court's decision.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of corroborative evidence, such as medical evidence, in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt in cases of sexual assault. It also underscores the gravity o....
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.