PUNE: A sessions court here on Wednesday convicted and sentenced a 75-year-old man to seven-year simple imprisonment for sexually assaulting a five-year-old girl at Ravet in July 2015.
Sessions judge S M Menjoge upheld additional public prosecutor Rajesh Kavedia's argument that seniority cannot earn immunity from imposing substantive sentence. Kavedia had cited a Bombay high court judgment to buttress his point.
Accused Dasa Bhimrao Chaudhary was initially chargesheeted for offences under sections 354 (outraging modesty) and 354-A (sexual harassment) of the Indian Penal Code and sections 11(2) and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, which refer to sexual harassment.
"At the time of framing of charges, we pressed for a trial for more serious offences under sections 4 and 8 of the POCSO Act considering the nature of acts committed by the accused and the need for greater punishment," Kavedia told TOI.
The court found the accused guilty on both these counts (see graphics). Soon after the pronouncement of the judgment, Chaudhary was taken into custody and sent to Yerawada jail.
The prosecution examined the girl, her mother, the medical officer who examined the survivor at the Sassoon General Hospital, a pancha witness present during the spot panchanama and the investigating officer. On the other hand, Chaudhary examined himself, his daughter and son-in-law as defence witnesses. But the court discarded their evidence as unreliable.
The court relied on the steady and reliable evidence recorded by the survivor and her mother and held that it stood corroborated by the medical report and the evidence recorded by the medical officer.
Chaudhary had taken a defence that he was implicated in the matter as the survivor's mother was not on good terms with his daughter, who had claimed a share in a motor accident claims tribunal compensation grant over the death of a relative in an accident.
He also cited discrepancies in the recovery of material from the scene of crime and argued that the girl's statement was recorded as late as in January 2016, whereas the alleged incident occurred in July 2015. As such, the possibility of the girl's evidence being influenced could not be ruled out, he argued.
The court pointed out that the appreciation of evidence on record was not based merely on the oral depositions of the survivor and her mother, but was adequately backed by the medical report and the medical officer's deposition. As such, the delay in recording of evidence was not a factor considering the girl's age and the fact that she had no reason to implicate the accused.
Sessions judge S M Menjoge upheld additional public prosecutor Rajesh Kavedia's argument that seniority cannot earn immunity from imposing substantive sentence. Kavedia had cited a Bombay high court judgment to buttress his point.
Accused Dasa Bhimrao Chaudhary was initially chargesheeted for offences under sections 354 (outraging modesty) and 354-A (sexual harassment) of the Indian Penal Code and sections 11(2) and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, which refer to sexual harassment.
"At the time of framing of charges, we pressed for a trial for more serious offences under sections 4 and 8 of the POCSO Act considering the nature of acts committed by the accused and the need for greater punishment," Kavedia told TOI.
The court found the accused guilty on both these counts (see graphics). Soon after the pronouncement of the judgment, Chaudhary was taken into custody and sent to Yerawada jail.
The prosecution examined the girl, her mother, the medical officer who examined the survivor at the Sassoon General Hospital, a pancha witness present during the spot panchanama and the investigating officer. On the other hand, Chaudhary examined himself, his daughter and son-in-law as defence witnesses. But the court discarded their evidence as unreliable.
The court relied on the steady and reliable evidence recorded by the survivor and her mother and held that it stood corroborated by the medical report and the evidence recorded by the medical officer.
Chaudhary had taken a defence that he was implicated in the matter as the survivor's mother was not on good terms with his daughter, who had claimed a share in a motor accident claims tribunal compensation grant over the death of a relative in an accident.
He also cited discrepancies in the recovery of material from the scene of crime and argued that the girl's statement was recorded as late as in January 2016, whereas the alleged incident occurred in July 2015. As such, the possibility of the girl's evidence being influenced could not be ruled out, he argued.
The court pointed out that the appreciation of evidence on record was not based merely on the oral depositions of the survivor and her mother, but was adequately backed by the medical report and the medical officer's deposition. As such, the delay in recording of evidence was not a factor considering the girl's age and the fact that she had no reason to implicate the accused.
Get latest news & live updates on the go on your pc with News App. Download The Times of India news app for your device.
