HC rejects plea of Pocso accused

Nagpur: Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court, in an interesting verdict, dismissed an appeal of Pocso accused while relying on the testimony of a beggar. While upholding three years rigorous imprisonment awarded to Gondia-based man for trying to force himself on the minor, the court ruled that just because witness is a beggar, who earns money pretending to be blind, her eyewitness account can't be discarded.

"The beggar deposed that she saw accused removing the survivor's undergarments. It's brought on record that she is a beggar and she begs pretending that she can't see. She also has eyesight problem. However, her testimony can't be discarded or brushed aside simply because she is a beggar pretending that she can't see," a single-judge bench of Justice Rohit Deo held.

Surendra Khobragade had challenged Gondia special court's verdict May 2 last year, where he was convicted under Sections 7 and 8 of the POCSO Act and is sentenced to suffer three years rigorous imprisonment (RI). He is also found guilty under Sections 354-A and 354-B of IPC and awarded one and three years RI respectively. Furthermore, he was convicted under Section 3 (1) (x) and (xii) of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities Act) and is sentenced to one year RI. For all four offences, he was told to pay a fine of Rs1,400 collectively.

The petitioner was accused of trying to sexually exploit a minor on January 1, 2013, before fleeing away from the spot after beggar Chhotibai Salunkhe raised an alarm. While the mentally challenged girl was playing in front of the house, the accused took her at a secluded spot, offered her money and biscuits. Chhotibai, who was present nearby, got suspicious of his activities and followed him. When she saw that Khobragade was removing nine-year-old's undergarments, she shouted, after which he fled away. She immediately alerted the her mother, who lodged a complaint with Ramnagar Police Station. Subsequently, the accused was booked for various offences and convicted by the special court.

Challenging his sentence in HC, the petitioner contended that the lower court falsely convicted him on the basis of beggar's testimony. He argued that Chhotibai had a slight vision problem and begs on road by pretending to be blind. He added that the survivor was instructed by her mother to depose against him on the basis of past enmity.

Justice Deo however discarded his version while stating that beggar's testimony is more than amply corroborated by statements of survivor, her mother and other witnesses. "On a holistic appreciation of the evidence, I am not persuaded to hold that such stray answers from the victim are sufficient to dent the credibility of her testimony. The charge that she was instructed by mother before deposition doesn't' necessarily suggest that she was tutored," the judge stated before dismissing the plea.