DINESH KESHAV TAMBE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has challenged the judgment and order dtd. 29/11/2018 passed by the Designated Judge for POCSO, Greater Bombay in POCSO Special Case No.497/2014. The appellant was convicted for commission of offence punishable under Sec. 376(2) of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to suffer RI for ten years and to pay fine of Rs.15,000.00 and in default of payment of fine to suffer RI for four months. The appellant was also convicted for commission of offence punishable under Sec. 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) and was sentenced to suffer RI for ten years and to pay fine of Rs.15,000.00 and in default of payment of fine to suffer RI for four months. On payment of the fine amount, it was directed to be paid to the victim. The substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently. The appellant was granted set-off under Sec. 428 of Cr.P.C.

(2.) The prosecution case is that the appellant was residing in the neighbourhood of the victim. The date of birth of the victim was 17/3/2008. The incident is dtd. 25/9/2014. The appellant's sister and the victim were friends. On the date of incident, the appellant took the victim to his house. He then committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim. The victim came back home. She was bleeding at her private parts. Her mother made inquiries with her. Then the victim narrated the incident to her. The victim's father was informed by her mother. Then they went to the police station. She was sent for medical treatment. After that the FIR was registered. The appellant was arrested on 26/9/2018. The investigation was carried out. Spot panchnama was conducted. The clothes of the victim and the accused-appellant were seized. The articles and other samples were sent for CA examination. Statement of witnesses were recorded. At the conclusion of the investigation, the charge-sheet was filed and the case was committed to the Special Court.

(3.) During trial, the prosecution examined eight witnesses, including the victim, her mother, Medical Officers, a pancha and the police officers. Besides this, the documentary evidence in the form of birth certificates of the victim and the appellant as well as CA reports were produced on record. The defence of the appellant was that mother of the victim was having affair with the victim's uncle. The appellant was aware of that. The victim's mother had threatened him that she would lodge a false complaint against him and the present prosecution is the result of the same.