Back
G. A. SANAP
Manohar S/o. Tikaram Kapgate – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra, through P. S. O. of Police Station Purada, Tah. Kurkheda, Distt – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
G. A. Sanap, J.
1. In this appeal, challenge is to the judgment and order dated 27.02.2020, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Gadchiroli, whereby the learned Judge held the accused guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 448 and 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “IPC”) and under Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, “POCSO Act”). He has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default to suffer simple imprisonment for ten days for the offence punishable under Section 448 of the IPC; rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- and in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(i) of the IPC. The accused, though convicted for the offence punishable under Section 4 of the POCSO Act, no separate sentence has been awarded.
2. BACKGROUND FACTS:
The First Information Report (FIR) in this case was registered on the report of respondent No.2 (hereinafter referred to as the “victim”). The victim and the accused are the residents of Palasgad, Tah. Kur
The judgment underscores the necessity of credible evidence and the adverse impact of delays in reporting sexual offences on the prosecution's case.
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 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 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 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 presumption under the POCSO Act is rebuttable and requires foundational facts to be established beyond reasonable doubt for conviction.
The court held that the uncorroborated testimony of a minor victim in a sexual assault case can sustain a conviction, provided it is credible.
(1) Delay – Delay per se cannot be the ground to discard and disbelieve the otherwise credible and trustworthy evidence of the prosecution witness. (2) Delay – If the prosecution is able to prove the....
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.
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
