Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 7, Cited by 1]

Bombay High Court

State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Tumsar Tah.Tumsar ... vs Virendra Alias Viru Ramesh Fule on 12 July, 2021

Author: Amit B. Borkar

Bench: V.M. Deshpande, Amit B. Borkar

                                    1                                   12-appa-424-20.odt

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                        NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.

              CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO. 424 OF 2020
                                                IN
                     CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.                          OF 2021
       The State of Maharashtra through PSO Tumsar, Dist. Bhandara
                                                Vs.
                    Virendra @ Viru Ramesh Fule and another
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of                              Court's or Judge's Order
 Coram, appearances, Court's Orders
 or directions and Registrar's order
                  Shri T. A. Mirza, A.P. P. for applicant/State.
                  None present for non-applicants.


                                   CORAM :-         V. M. DESHPANDE AND
                                                    AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.
                                   DATED :-         12.07.2021


                                   Hearing        was     conducted         through        Video

Conferencing and learned counsel agreed that the audio and visual quality were proper.

2. This is an application filed by the State seeking leave to file appeal challenging the judgment and order of the acquittal passed by learned Special Judge (under POCSO Act), Bhandara dated 24.02.2020 in Special Criminal (POCSO) Case No. 49/2018, whereby the non-applicants were acquitted for the offence punishable under Sections 376-D, 341, 323 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short, "POCSO Act").

3. Heard Shri T. A. Mirza, learned A.P.P. for the applicant/State. None present for the non-applicants.

::: Uploaded on - 12/07/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 13/07/2021 05:38:14 :::

2 12-appa-424-20.odt

4. The victim girl is 14 years of age. On 09.09.2018, she was clinically examined by Dr. Anita Karemore (PW3). Dr. Anita's evidence shows that on examination she found abrasion over left forearm, abrasion over right forearm, abrasion over left leg of the victim girl. The victim is also examined as PW1. Her evidence would show that she was dragged in half constructed shop in the lane and thereafter there was sexual assault on her.

5. We are of the view that re-look to the impugned judgment is absolutely necessary due to the observation made by the learned Trial Judge that presumption under Sections 28 and 29 of the POCSO Act cannot be made applicable in this case because, the prosecution has fails to rebut the intention of the accused. This observation cannot be sustained the scrutiny of law in view of the evidence of the victim girl and the Doctor.

6. Hence, we pass the following order:-

                   (i)         The application is allowed.

                   (ii)        Leave    is   granted    to    file    the     appeal

challenging the judgment and order of acquittal passed by learned Special Judge (under POCSO Act), Bhandara dated 24.02.2020 in Special Criminal (POCSO) Case No. 49/2018.





::: Uploaded on - 12/07/2021                     ::: Downloaded on - 13/07/2021 05:38:14 :::
                                            3                          12-appa-424-20.odt

                           CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.               OF 2021

                                           Heard.

                           2.              Admit.

3. Action under Section 390 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) be taken against respondent no. 2.

4. When the respondent is are brought before the Court, in execution of action under Section 390 of Cr.P.C., they shall be released on bail in respect of the present case on they executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.5,000/- with one solvent surety of the like amount.

5. So far as the action under Section 390 of Cr.P.C. against the respondent no. 1 is concerned, since according to learned A.P.P. the respondent no. 1 is already serving life imprisonment therefore, the notice of this appeal to be served on respondent no. 1 in jail, where he was serving life sentence.

                                       JUDGE                               JUDGE



RR Jaiswal




        ::: Uploaded on - 12/07/2021                      ::: Downloaded on - 13/07/2021 05:38:14 :::