State Of Mah., Thr. Pso Ps ... vs Surendra S/O Vishnu Lonkar
2021 Latest Caselaw 481 Bom

                                               1                                      6 appa 242.2020

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

                   CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO. 242 OF 2020

                              State of Maharashtra, thr. P.S.O., Nagpur.
                                                ..vs..
                                     Surendra s/o Vishnu Lonkar
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,                                   Court's or Judge's orders
appearances, Court's orders of directions
and Registrar's orders
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Ms. H.N. Jaipurkar, A.P.P. for applicant-State.



                                          CORAM : VINAY JOSHI, J.

DATED : 09/01/2021

The applicant-State is seeking leave to file appeal in terms of Section 378(3) for challenging the order of acquittal passed in Special (POCSO) case No. 5 of 2019 decided on 11.12.2019. The respondent/accused was charged for the offence punishable under Section 354-A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. It was the prosecution case that, the victim girl aged 17 years and the accused were neighbors. On 23.12.2017, the accused entered into the house of the victim and sexually harassed her by touching to her person. The accused allegedly threatened the victim for not to disclose the incident to anyone. The victim further stated that then on 01.04.2018 also the accused caught hold her hand while traveling in the vehicle. Then on 31.10.2018, the accused met victim and threatened her since she refused to talk with him. On the basis of such allegations, report was lodged on 03.11.2018.

2. Gone through the evidence of victim and

2 6 appa 242.2020

impugned judgment. The Trial Court observed that the victim girl was of age of understanding and therefore, eleven months delay in lodging report from first occurrence itself is not free from doubt. Moreover, Trial Court has pointed toward the admission of victim that there was dispute in between parents of both. The reasoning given by the Trial Court appears to be sound and a most probable view. The provisions for leave is meant to weed out uncalled litigation which may ultimately would not achieve any purpose.

3. Having regard to the inordinate delay and other improbabilities, it is not a fit case to continue furthermore. In view of that, leave to appeal stands refused and ultimately, Appeal stands dismissed.

JUDGE Trupti