RAVI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present application has been filed for suspension of substantive sentence imposed by learned Sessions Judge, Nanded in Special Case (POCSO) No.33/2014, dated 5.11.2019, whereby the present applicant-appellant has been sentenced to suffer R.I. for ten years and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default, R.I. for one year.

(2.) Heard learned Advocate and learned APP for respective parties.

(3.) It has been vehemently submitted on behalf of the applicant that the learned Special Judge has not appreciated the evidence properly. The main point that was required to be considered was, determination of age of the prosecutrix. It has come on record that the victim girl was missing since 10.9.2014 and after getting information, that the present appellant has taken her, report came to be lodged. It was transpired that the prosecutrix and the present appellant were at Dehu-Aalandi area. There is nothing in the evidence of the girl to state that the applicant has done any such overt act which will amount to kidnapping her. In fact, there were three records, which had come before the court having different birth dates of the child and, therefore, in the appeal that has been filed by the applicant-appellant, re-appreciation of evidence is required to consider whether the Special Judge was correct in holding that the victim was a child within the definition of Section 2(d) of the POCSO Act. The conviction is under the POCSO Act only and the applicant has been acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 363 , 366 , 376(2)(n) and 376(2)(k) of Indian Penal Code. Therefore, the applicant is having every hope of success in the appeal. The applicant though was in jail through the trial also;yet since the main point to be considered is age of the victim girl, the sentence imposed on him deserves to be suspended.