Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
ASHISH S.CHAVAN
Seftin Raza Kosambi, S/o. Mohammed Yusuf Kosambi – Appellant
Versus
State of Goa, (through) The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Bombay at Goa – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ASHISH S.CHAVAN, J.
1. By way of the present Appeal, the Appellant has challenged the judgment and order dated 11.04.2025 and 21.04.2025 passed by the learned Special Court, POCSO, Panaji, Goa, in Sessions Case No.26/2022 convicting him for offences punishable under Section 376 of IPC and Section 4 of POCSO Act, 2012. The substantive sentence under Section 376 of IPC is 10 years of rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) in default to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment. The substantive sentence under Section 4 of POCSO Act, 2012 is ten years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) in default to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment. If the fine amount is realised, the same is directed to be paid to the victim after the appeal period is over. Both sentences are to run concurrently.
2. Although charge was framed against the Appellant under Section 363, 376 of IPC read with Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012, the Appellant was acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC vide judgment dated 11.04.2025.
3. It is the case of the prosecution that on 28.09.2017, mother of the vict
Point of Law : Prosecution has failed to prove beyond doubt that the victim was below 18 years of age as on the date of the incident. Under these circumstances, the accused cannot be held guilty of o....
Sexual Autonomy encompasses both, right to engage in wanted sexual activity and right to be protected from unwanted sexual aggression – Only when both aspects of adolescent’s rights are recognized, h....
It stands well settled that circumstances not put to an accused under Section 313 Cr.PC. cannot be used against him and must be excluded from consideration - In a criminal trial, importance of questi....
(1) It is only when there is penetrative sexual assault which implies sexual contact with or without consent of minor victim, that offences under POCSO Act are committed.(2) Only in absence of birth ....
Sections 3 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 reads as penetrative sexual assault.
The consent of a minor for sexual intercourse is of no consequence under POCSO Act and IPC 375, and the absence of enticement or inducement is crucial in determining the offence of kidnapping under I....
The court established that unreliable age evidence and inconsistencies in the victim's account, coupled with her prior consent, undermined the conviction under the POCSO Act.
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
