ANITA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The victim is produced before us by Ms. Ashwini Gaikwad, Child Development Officer of Snahabalgarh, Ahmednagar. The petitioner who is her mother is also present. The learned advocate for the petitioner is also present as also the learned APP. Mr. Bhosale learned advocate has filed an application for intervention for and on behalf of the original informant who claims to be the aunt of the victim.

(2.) Going by the documents, the victim is still aged less than 17 years. She has been kept in the Shelter Home since after registration of the crime. She also states to have delivered a baby. The victim also informs us that she has not been detained in the Shelter Home but expresses her desire to go back to the petitioner-mother.

(3.) The learned advocate Mr. Bhosale submits that the petitioner in spite of being the mother did not object to and allowed the victim to be impregnated at such a tender age and now acting at the behest of the person responsible for this and against whom the intervenor had to file the F.I.R. on the basis of which an offence has been registered against him under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.