2025:BHC-AS:46514-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 927 OF 2018 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 390 OF 2020 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 492 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3024 OF 2023 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4761 OF 2023 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3624 OF 2024 Rakesh Baban Gohar, Age 39 Years, Occupation – Service, Residing at Room No.61, Opposite B.M.C. Building No.19, Liberty Bakery, Musa Killedar Street, Byculla, Mumbai-11.

(At present lodged at Yerawada Central Prison, Pune.) …..Appellant/Applicant Vs.

1) The State Of Maharashtra, (ThroughTardeo Police Station, Mumbai), Crime No.36 of 2015.

2) X.Y.Z., Age-17 Years, Occupation- Student, Residing at Sinhagad Building, 2^nd Floor, Room No.204, A Wing, Mumbai Central, Bellasis Bridge, Mumbai-34. …..Respondents ___________________________________

Mr. Ajit Savagave, Advocate appointed by Legal Aid Committee for the Appellant/Applicant.

Mr. Amit A. Palkar APP, for the Respondent-State.

None for Respondent No.2.

_____________________________________

CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, JJ.

DATE : 29th SEPTEMBER, 2025.

JUDGMENT (Per- A.S.Gadkari, J.):-

1) Appellant has impugned Judgment and Order dated 3^rd October, 2017, passed by the learned Special Judge under POCSO Act, Greater Mumbai, in POCSO Special Case No.194 of 2015, convicting the Appellant under Sections 6, 10 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, “the POCSO Act” ) and under Section 354 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, (for short, “IPC”) and is sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, rigorous imprisonment for 7 years under Section 10 of the POCSO Act and rigorous imprisonment for 3 years under Section 12 of the POCSO Act.

As the Appellant is convicted under the provisions of the POCSO Act in maximum terms, separate sentence under Sections 354 and 376 of the IPC is not awarded by the trial Court, as per the provisions of Section 42 of the POCSO Act.

2) At the outset, it be noted here that, the victim herein is the real daughter of the Appellant. The victim was a minor on the date of commission of the offence under the POCSO Act and therefore with a view to protect her identity and in consonance with the provisions of Section 228(A) of the IPC and Section 33(7) of the POCSO Act, the detailed narration of facts and other details thereby revealing identity of victim and her mother, are hereinafter avoided.

3) Heard Mr. Savagave, learned Advocate appointed by the Legal Aid Committee to represent the Appellant, Mr. Palkar, learned APP for the Respondent No.1-State. Perused entire record.

4) The First Information Report (“FIR” ) was lodged by the victim herself on 15^th February, 2015 under Sections 354, 509 and 506 of the IPC and under Sections 10 and 12 of the POCSO Act, against the Appellant.

4.1) The said FIR was initially recorded by Mr. Dinkar Ilag (PW No.- 9) then attached to Agripada Police Station, Mumbai as crime No.00/2015. After recording the FIR, the concerned Officer found that, the cause of action for lodging of the said crime was under the jurisdiction of Tardeo Police Station, Mumbai. Therefore it was transferred for further investigation to Tardeo Police Station, Mumbai.

4.2) At Tardeo Police Station, Smt. Surekha Dighe received the papers from Agripada Police Station of the present crime which was registered as crime No.36 of 2015. The investigation of the said crime was handed over to the Police Inspector Mr. Sangram Pache (PW No.10)

attached to Tardeo Police Station. During the course of investigation, PW No.10 realized that, the offence under Section 6 of the POCSO Act has also been made out.

4.3) It is the allegation against the Appellant that, the Appellant sexually assaulted his daughter, the victim (PW No.1) initially by showing her obscene pictures/clips from his mobile phone and secondly indulging into the acts as contemplated punishable under Sections