Back
G. A. SANAP
Rajesh Murlidhar Lonbale – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station Officer, Police Station Durgapur – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
G. A. Sanap, J.
1. In this appeal, the appellant/accused has challenged the judgment and order dated 26.02.2021. The learned Special Judge has held the accused guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 376(1), 376(2)(l) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “the I.P.C.”) and under Sections 4, 6 and 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, “the POCSO Act”) and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for six months.
2. Background facts:-
The First Information Report was registered on the report of the informant (PW-1). Awadta Ramteke (PW-1) is the maternal aunt of the victim. In the report, the informant has stated that at the relevant time the accused was working as a Malaria worker. On 17.11.2014, he along with other health workers had come to village Kitali. In the village, there was death of one person due to dengue. The team of heath workers was deputed to carry out the survey and treat the patients. The accused and other health workers visited the house of the victim on 17.11.2014. The victim was examined by th
The presumption of guilt under the POCSO Act requires a solid evidentiary foundation, which was not established in this case, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
The prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, and any doubt must be resolved in favor of the accused.
The judgment underscores the necessity of credible evidence and the adverse impact of delays in reporting sexual offences on the prosecution's case.
The judgment reinforces the importance of corroborative evidence in sexual assault cases, particularly when the victim is a minor, and clarifies the legal standards for assessing credibility and dela....
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 prosecution failed to prove the victim's age and the occurrence of the alleged incident beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the appellant's acquittal.
The prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt; inconsistencies in testimony and delay in reporting undermine credibility.
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
