Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
ANIL L.PANSARE, RAJ D.WAKODE, JJ.
Suresh, S/o. Govindrao Muneshwar – Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra – Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 461 OF 2020
Decided On : 23-02-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. victim under six years by birth certificate. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 2. victim's consistent accusation and fear of appellant. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 3. victim's testimony corroborated despite minor inconsistencies. (Para 17 , 18) |
| 4. medical evidence proves vaginal penetration and hymen tears. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 5. finger insertion constitutes rape under ipc 375(b). (Para 23) |
| 6. dna matches victim's blood on clothes and spot. (Para 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 7. appellant's alibi and enmity defenses unsupported. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 8. ward number discrepancy not fatal to prosecution. (Para 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 9. seizure delays do not affect evidence validity. (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
| 10. police statement reading affects probative value only. (Para 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44) |
| 11. minor contradictions and non-examinations rejected. (Para 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51) |
| 12. appeal against conviction dismissed. (Para 52) |
| 13. life sentence upheld for child sexual assault. (Para 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59) |
JUDGMENT :
RAJ D. WAKODE, J.
Heard Mr. Anil Mardikar, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. S.A. Kanetkar, learned counsel for the appellant, and Mr. S.S.Doifode, learned APP for the respondent/State.
02. The present appellant has approached this Court seeking challenge to the impugned judgment and order dated 23rd October, 2020, passed by the learned District Judge-2 and Special Judge (POCSO Act), Wardha, in Special (POCSO) Case No. 40 of 2016, whereby the learned Special Judge convicted the present appellant for the offences punishable under Section 376(2)(f)(i) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Sections 5(i), 5(m), and 5(p), punishable under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life, meaning imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life, for the offence punishable under (2)(f)(i) of the IPC and under Section 6 of the POCSO Act. He has also been directed to pay a fine of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only), which shall be payable to the victim.
03. The prosecution case leading to the conviction of the present appellant is as follows:
PW-2 Dinesh Sudhakar Fulzele, the complainant, is the maternal uncle of the victim. The victim was residing with her maternal grandmother and maternal uncles at Mouza Barbadi, Tahsil and District Wardha. On 11th October, 2015, at about 5:00 p.m., the complainant was at home, while the victim was playing with her friends near the house. The complainant took some money from his mother and went out. Upon his return, the victim also came home and went to his mother. It was noticed that the victim’s frock was soaked with blood.
04. The complainant’s mother removed the victim’s clothes, including her panties, in his presence and saw that the victim’s vagina was bleeding profusely. When questioned by the complainant’s mother, the victim stated that she had gone to Bittu’s house to play and that Bittu’s father had inserted something into her vagina, causing pain and bleeding. When the complainant questioned her again, she reiterated the same thing. The victim’s frock and panties were found soaked in blood.
05. Thereafter, the complainant and his elder brother admitted the victim to Sewagram Hospital. Upon examination, the doctor informed them that the victim had been sexually assaulted. Consequently, the complainant approached the respondent police station and lodged a complaint on 11th October, 2015, which is at Exhibit 22. On the basis of the said complaint, FIR No.345/2015 was registered against the present appellant on the same day, which is at Exhibit 23.
06. Pursuant to the registration of the FIR, the respondent conducted the investigation and, upon completion thereof, filed the charge-sheet. The learned Trial Court framed the charge against the appellant vide Exhibit 4. The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
07. In order to bring home the guilt of the appellant, the prosecution examined total of
AI
Conviction for rape and aggravated penetrative sexual assault on infant girl by finger insertion upheld based on victim's reliable testimony corroborated by medical (hymenal tears) and forensic (DNA)....
Statements recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are not substantive evidence and serve only to corroborate or contradict during trial under strict procedural compliance. Conse....
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 judgment establishes the importance of corroborative evidence, the presumption of guilt under the POCSO Act, and the standard of proof required for the accused to prove innocence in cases of sexu....
The testimony of a child victim is sufficient for conviction in sexual assault cases if credible, even amidst minor discrepancies and delays in FIR filing.
The prosecution failed to establish the elements of penetrative sexual assault under the POCSO Act, leading to the quashing of conviction due to insufficient evidence and unreliable witness testimoni....
The conviction for sexual offences against minors can rely on circumstantial evidence and victim testimony, reinforced by medical reports, even amidst witness hostility.
A conviction for sexual assault cannot be sustained solely on the testimony of a prosecutrix when there are material contradictions between her statement under Section 164 CrPC and her trial testimon....
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....
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
