2024:BHC-NAG:11541 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

CRIMINAL APPEAL (APEAL) NO. 196 OF 2022 Chetan Kailas Vaidya, Aged about 25 yrs, R/o. Shivar, Bhandari, Tahsil Arni, District Yavatmal .... APPELLANT // V E R S U S //

1. State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station Officer, Police Station Ghatanji Tahsil Arni, District Yavatmal.

2. XYZ, The Victim in Crime No. 06 of 2019 Registered at Police Station Ghatanji, Tahsil Arni, District Yavatmal ... RESPONDENTS ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ms Sapana Jadhav, Advocate for the appellant Mr Harshal Futane, APP for the respondent No.1/State Ms Priyanka Arbat (Awthale), Advocate (appointed) for respondent No.2 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CORAM : G. A. SANAP, J.

DATE : 03/10/2024 O R A L J U D G M E N T :

1 Heard.

2 ADMIT. Taken up for final disposal by the consent of learned Advocates for the parties.

3 In this appeal, challenge is to the judgment and order, dated 25.02.2022, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, [Special Court (POCSO Act)] Yavatmal (for short ‘the learned Judge’), whereby the learned Judge, convicted the appellant/ accused for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘the IPC’) and Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short ‘the POCSO Act’) and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten (10) years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) and in default to suffer simple imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of the IPC. No separate sentence has been awarded for the offence punishable under Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act.

4 Background facts:

The report against the appellant was lodged by the informant (PW-2) on 02.01.2019 with Gatanji Police Station, District Yavatmal. The case of the prosecution, which can be gathered from the report is that the appellant is a maternal cousin of the victim. They are residents of the same village. The appellant would come to the house of the victim. It is stated that in the month of June 2018, the appellant went to the house of the victim and expressed his love for her. The appellant proposed to the victim to marry with him. The victim consented to marry with the appellant. The appellant promised to marry with her and on the false promise of marriage, committed a sexual intercourse with her. The appellant would call the victim to his house on the pretext of doing household work. The appellant on three occasions committed sexual intercourse with the victim on the promise of marriage. Lastly, on 16.10.2018, at about 8 p.m., the appellant committed sexual intercourse with the victim and at that time the appellant told her to meet him on 19.10.2018 at his agricultural land. Due to some work, the victim could not go to the land of the appellant. Therefore, the appellant quarrelled with her. The appellant threatened to kill the victim and members of her family. The appellant since then discontinued his relations with the victim. It is stated that on account of sexual intercourse committed by the appellant with the victim, she became pregnant. The victim requested the appellant to marry with her after attaining the age of 18 years. The appellant refused to marry with her. The victim, on being confronted with such a situation, alongwith her father, went to Ghatanji Police Station on 02.01.2019 and lodged the report against the appellant.

5 On the basis of this report, the crime bearing No. 6 of 2019 was registered against the appellant. PW- 8 Ganpat Pappulwar carried out the investigation. He referred the victim for medical examination. The appellant was arrested. The blood samples of the victim and the appellant had been collected. Similarly, the pregnancy test was conducted. The pregnancy test revealed that the victim was