SANTOSH TARACHAND RATHOD Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard, learned A.P.P., has placed on record the certified copy of the rozanama. It would substantiate the allegation made by the Counsel for the applicant on the last occasion. The charge-sheet was filed, In the present case, on 22/4/2013, applicant herein was charge-sheeted for offence punishable under sections 354, 376 and 511 of Indian Penal Code and sections 7 and 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

(2.) The compilation of the charge-sheet would show that witnesses have given consistent statement that on 17/3/2013 mother had picked up the child from the house of the applicant and had taken her home. When the child was taken home, she was fully dressed. At that juncture, she had not disclosed to her mother that she had been ravished by the present applicant. Compilation of the charge-sheet do not contain the statement of the victim. The statement of the victim was recorded on 11/6/2013. On 14/6/2013 the Investigating Officer had filed an application under section 173(8) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking permission from the Magistrate to include the statement of the victim compilation of the charge-sheet. On 14/6/ 2013, the Magistrate had granted permission.

(3.) The copy of the said statement was not given to the accused/applicant. On 8/8/ 2013, in the course of hearing of the application for bail filed by the present applicant in this Court, the Counsel representing the applicant had specifically submitted that the charge was framed against the accused on 29/7/2013 and on 8/8/2013, the witnesses were examined. The lacuna was demonstrated by the Counsel for the applicant. Learned APP had submitted that the statement of the victim recorded on 11/6/2013 was not given to the accused. In fact, it was incumbent upon Sessions Judge to given legal assistance to the accused as contemplated under section 304 of Code of Criminal Procedure.