Nagpur. Under the POCSO Act, in addition to the District Sessions Court, the Civil Court has sentenced 10 years imprisonment and 11,000 rupees. was sentenced to a fine of Rs. Extreme. Challenging this order of the Civil Judge, Ashokkumar Thackeray filed an appeal in the High Court, after hearing which Judge Vinay Joshi first issued orders for release on bail only after depositing the fine amount. On behalf of the petitioner Rajendra Daga and Assistant Public Prosecutor AR Chutke argued on behalf of the government. According to the prosecution, 10 years imprisonment was sentenced under section 376(2)(i)(j). Apart from this, a separate punishment of one year and Rs 11,000 under section 506B. A fine of Rs.
Decision has been taken on solid facts
Strongly opposing the appeal, it was told from the government side that this crime against the woman has had an impact on the entire society. Even the evidence of the victim is quite convincing. The age of the victim cannot be ignored. Keeping all these things in mind, the decision was given by the lower court only on the basis of solid facts, so that this appeal should not be taken cognizance of. It was told on behalf of the petitioner that the evidence placed in the lower court has not been sufficient. This evidence is not capable of proving the petitioner guilty in the eyes of law. After hearing both the sides, the court was of the view that even though the age of the victim is being told as 15 years, but objection is being raised from the defense side regarding the age.
Documentary evidence ignored
super. Daga said that documentary evidence was placed in the trial court regarding the age of the victim but it was ignored. The lower court accepted the statement given only orally on the date of birth. At the time when the FIR was registered, the victim had not disclosed her age. Even at the time the statement was recorded under section 164, this information was not recorded. Since the direct effect of age has been in the decision of the lower court. Therefore, cognizance should be taken in this context. During the hearing, the court’s attention was also drawn to the medical officer’s report, after which the High Court adjourned the sentence heard by the trial court till the decision of the appeal.