STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. ISHWAR NATHA TALEKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present application has been filed seeking leave under Sec. 378(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure [ Cr.P.C .] to file an appeal challenging the acquittal of the respondent by the Special Judge under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 [POCSO Act]/Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar in Special Case No. 265 of 2017 from the offences punishable under Ss. 376(2)(f)(i)(n), 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code [ IPC ] and Ss. 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act on 19/9/2019.

(2.) Heard learned APP Mr. A. V. Deshmukh. With his able assistance, we have gone through the entire material which was before the learned trial Judge.

(3.) Prosecution story in short is that the prosecutrix, aged 15 years, was studying in Mission Girls Home at a different place than where her parents and younger brother were staying. Her date of birth is 29/4/2002. She used to visit her parents in holidays. Accused is the cousin brother of her father and he used to reside with his wife and daughters in the same town. The niece of the accused aged 11 years was also studying in the same school where the prosecutrix was taking education and her parents were the neighbours of the parents of the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix and the niece of the accused used to visit the house of the accused whenever they used to go to visit their parents. The prosecutrix and the niece of the accused had gone to the house of their parents on 12/4/2017 after their summer vacation had started. Thereafter, in the evening on 16/6/2017, the prosecutrix was at home. Accused came to her house on motorcycle. The parents of prosecutrix as well as the niece of the accused were at home and then accused asked the prosecutrix and his niece to accompany him to his house and therefore they went along with him. The wife of the accused was at home. She told that she would return after washing utensils. It is the prosecution story that the accused had also gone out of the house and then prosecutrix and niece of the accused were in his house. Accused returned around 9.00 to 9.30 p.m. and asked his niece to stay outside the house. Accused bolted the door from inside and then, had forcible sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix. Thereafter, wife of the accused came and she had raised hue and cry after she had peeped him from the net of the door, as a result of which, accused opened the door. There was quarrel between the accused and his wife. As it was late night, the prosecutrix and the niece of the accused stayed in the house of the accused. On the next day around 10.00 a.m. accused told the prosecutrix and his niece that he would drop them and therefore, they went along with him on motorcycle. Accused thereafter stopped the vehicle near an abandoned house. When asked as to why he has stopped the vehicle there, he told that there is a shortcut. The door of that house was opened and the prosecutrix was forced to go inside and the niece was forcibly asked to stay outside. On that place also the accused had raped the prosecutrix and threatened that she would be defamed in the relatives. Due to fear, she did not disclose the incident to anybody. The school started from 18/6/2017. Therefore, she went to school with her mother. She then disclosed that she started vomiting and dysentery on 31/8/2017. She was taken to Government Hospital and thereafter, the school teachers asked her as to whether she had sexual intercourse with anybody and then she disclosed everything to the school teachers. It was then told to her that she was pregnant and then, after her parents were informed, the school authorities and the parents took her to police station and lodged the report.