PUNJAB TANUJI RATHOD Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal, challenge is to the judgment and order dtd. 3/1/2022, passed by the learned Extra Joint District Judge and Additional Sessions Judge, Akola, whereby the learned Judge convicted the accused of the offences punishable under Sec. 377 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, "IPC") and under Sec. 3(a) punishable under Sec. 4; under Sec. 5(m) punishable under Sec. 6 and under Sec. 11(vi) punishable under Sec. 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, "POCSO Act"), and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000.00 and in default to suffer simple imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Sec. 377 of the IPC; rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000.00 and in default to suffer simple imprisonment for six months for the offence under Sec. 3(a) punishable under Sec. 4 of the POCSO Act; rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000.00 and in default to suffer simple imprisonment for six months for the offence under Sec. 5(m) punishable under Sec. 6 of the POCSO Act and rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000.00 and in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months for the offence under Sec. 11(vi) punishable under Sec. 12 of the POCSO Act.

(2.) BACKGROUND FACTS:

(3.) PW-6 conducted the investigation. The Investigating Officer referred the victim-boy for medical examination. The Investigating Officer seized the cloths of the accused as well as the cloths of the victim. He drew the spot panchanama. The statements of the victim, his mother, and PW-7 were recorded as per the requisition of the Investigating Officer by the learned Magistrate. The Investigating Officer collected the record with regard to the birth date of the victim. On completion of the investigation, she filed the charge-sheet against the accused.