Back
G. A. SANAP
Vijay S/o Manoharrao Jawanjal – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. In this appeal, challenge is to the judgment and order dated 22.01.2021, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1, Achalpur, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge held the appellant/accused guilty of the offence punishable under Section 376AB of the Indian Penal Code (for short, “the I.P.C.”) and under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, “the POCSO Act”) and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for twenty years and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/-, in default of payment of the fine to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.
2. Background facts:-
PW-1 is the mother of victim-informant. The report of the crime was lodged on 08.03.2019. It is stated in the report by the informant that the victim, on the date of the commission of the crime was 8 years old. She was studying in the 3rd standard. On 08.03.2019 at about 9.00 a.m. she went to play near the Samaj Mandir of the village. She did not come back and therefore, at about 10.00 a.m. the informant went there and brought her back. The informant gave her a bath and sent her to school. The victim returned from the school at 5.30 p.m. The informant notic
The presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act requires the prosecution to first prove foundational facts beyond a reasonable doubt for it to operate against the accused.
Statutorial presumption u/s 29 and 30 of POCSO Act certainly places a persuasive burden on appellant to show that he does not possess requisite culpable mental state for offence for which he is prose....
The judgment reinforces the evidentiary standards in sexual assault cases involving minors, highlighting the importance of witness credibility and medical corroboration.
The competence of child witnesses, scrutiny of hostile witnesses' testimony, and the significance of corroborative evidence and the presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act are central legal pri....
The presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act requires foundational facts to be established; mere reliance on medical evidence without corroboration is insufficient for conviction.
The presumption under the POCSO Act is rebuttable and requires foundational facts to be established beyond reasonable doubt for conviction.
The court upheld the conviction based on the victim's credible testimony and medical evidence, affirming that under the POCSO Act, the burden shifts to the accused to rebut presumption of guilt.
The prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, and any doubt must be resolved in favor of the accused.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
