Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR
NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J
Ashish S/o Gangadhar Lonare – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT
This is the Criminal Appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (henceforth referred to as “Cr.P.C.” for short) against the judgment and order dated 20.5.2022, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Nagpur in Special Case No.70/2017 convicting and sentencing the Appellant as follows:-
a) For the offence punishable under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code (henceforth referred to as “I.P.C.” for short) and sentencing to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default to pay fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 months;
b) For the offence punishable under Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (henceforth referred to as “POCSO Act” for short) and sentencing to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default to pay fine, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 2 months;
c) For the offence punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and sentencing to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to pay fine, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 3 months.
2. The prosecution’s case, as revealed from the poli
None. The provided case law excerpt does not indicate that it has been overruled, reversed, criticized, or otherwise treated as bad law. It appears to be a foundational or guiding principle regarding the privacy of victims and the standard of proof in criminal cases. Without explicit references to subsequent treatment, this case remains unchallenged in the provided data.
Followed/Distinguished/Clarified:
The case emphasizes the importance of protecting victims' privacy and clarifies the standard of proof ("beyond reasonable doubt") in criminal cases. Its language suggests it is an authoritative statement on these issues, but there is no explicit indication that it has been followed, distinguished, or otherwise treated in subsequent rulings within this data set.
Uncertain Treatment:
The case law list provides no references or language indicating how this case has been treated in later judgments. Without such indicators, its judicial treatment remains uncertain. It is not explicitly marked as overruled, criticized, or otherwise.
The treatment of this case law is unclear based on the provided information. There are no references to subsequent case law or judicial commentary that clarify whether it has been followed, distinguished, or overruled. Therefore, its current legal standing and treatment are uncertain.
**Source :** State of Rajasthan VS Chatra - Supreme Court
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
