[Cites 16, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Sudhir Sukhdeo Bhalerao vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another on 19 January, 2026
2026:BHC-AUG:2651
3.APEAL.506.2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 506 OF 2022
Sudhir Sukhdeo Bhalerao,
Age : 41 Years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Near Datta Mandir, Gandhinagar,
Bolhegaon, Tq. & Dist. Ahmednagar ...APPELLANT
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Police Inspector,
Tofkhana Police Station,
Tq. & Dist. Ahmednagar.
2. X.Y.Z. ...RESPONDENTS
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1915 OF 2022
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 506 OF 2022
***
Mr. Tandale Kakasaheb J., Advocate for the Appellant.
Ms. A. S. Deshmukh, APP for Respondent - State.
Mr. R. B. Narwade Patil, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
***
CORAM : RAJNISH R. VYAS, J.
DATE : JANUARY 19, 2026
JUDGMENT :
1. Knock on the door of justice is by the accused / appellant
by preferring the appeal challenging the conviction awarded in Special
Case No.134 of 2019 by Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar, on
06th December 2021, by which he is convicted for the commission of
offenses punishable under Sections 376(3), 376C, 376(2)(f), 377 and
3.APEAL.506.2022
506 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter would be referred as the
"IPC" for the sake of brevity) and under Sections 4, 6 and 10 of
Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act (hereinafter would be
referred to the "Act of 2012" for the sake of brevity).
2. The appellant was directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment
for twenty years and to pay fine of ₹ 20,000/-, and in default, to suffer
simple imprisonment for three months, for the commission of offense
punishable Under Sections 376(3) of IPC. A fine of ₹ 20,000/- was
also imposed.
3. Sofar as the conviction under Section 377 of the IPC is
concerned, he was directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five
years and to pay fine of ₹ 2,000/-, and in default, to suffer simple
imprisonment for seven days.
4. Sentence of one year / rigorous imprisonment and a fine of
₹ 1,000/- was imposed for the commission of the offense punishable
under Section 506 of the IPC. Default sentence was also imposed. All
the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
3.APEAL.506.2022
5. Learned counsel, Mr. Kakasaheb Tandale, has advanced his
arguments for the appellant, whereas the learned APP, Ms. Deshmukh,
has appeared for the prosecution. The victim is represented by
Advocate, Mr. Narwade. With their able assistance, I have gone
through the record of the case and pondered over the issue.
6. A first information report was registered against the
present appellant, which resulted into registration of Crime No.515 of
2019 dated 22nd March 2019 with Tofkhana Police Station,
Ahmednagar, which set wheels of criminal law in motion. The report
was lodged by the victim of the crime, who at the time of incident, was
13 years old. The accused / appellant is the stepfather of the victim.
7. During the course of the investigation, the appellant was
arrested at about 05:26 hours on 22nd March 2019. After his arrest,
the clothes were recovered from the appellant. As offenses under the
Act of 2012 were also registered, the documents pertaining to the date
of birth of the victim were also seized. After completion of
investigation, the appellant was charge-sheeted. As the appellant did
not plead guilty to the charge, which was framed below Exhibit 5 by
Special Court (POCSO Act), Ahmednagar, on 09th August 2019, the
prosecution relied upon eight witnesses, to prove the guilt of the
3.APEAL.506.2022
accused.
8. Charges were framed under Section 376(3), 376(C),
376(2)(f), Section 377, and Section 506 of IPC; Section 3 punishable
under Section 4 of the Act of 2012; Section 5 punishable under Section
6 of the Act of 2012; as well as Section 9 (n) punishable under Section
10 of the Act of 2012.
9. The incident, which has resulted in setting the criminal law
in motion, is narrated by the victim of the crime in the first
information report, who was examined as PW-1 . In brief, it was the
case of the victim that, at the time of the incident, she was studying in
a primary school in the 7th Standard and was residing at Gandhinagar, ,
with the appellant and her brother Sudhanshu.
10. The mother of PW-1 was residing at Pune, as the quarrel
had taken place between the mother and the appellant. According to
her, the appellant was her step father and when she was in a nursery,
the appellant used to penetrate penis into her mouth and on that
count quarrel used to take place between the appellant and the mother
of PW-1, which also resulted into beating given by the appellant to PW-
1's mother.
3.APEAL.506.2022
11. According to the victim, on several occasions she was
subjected to the said act, as well as to the unnatural sex and ultimately
to vaginal intercourse. The accused also used to gag her mouth and
perform the act, and had also stuffed clothes into her mouth,
threatening that if the incident is disclosed to anybody, she would be
taken to task.
12. It is in this background that PW-1 was examined and
criminal law, as already stated, moved further.
13. The learned counsel for the appellant has contended that
the story advanced by PW-1 and other witnesses is not trustworthy and
is a striking example of false implication. He further submitted that
there was a delay in lodging the first information report, which was
not explained by the prosecution. According to him, the initial
information of the incident was given by the victim to her mother on
the telephone and subsequently to the police by dialing the 100
number. He thus submits that it was necessary on the part of
Investigating Officer to collect the call details.
14. He further submitted that since the victim was accustomed
to using of mobile phone since many years, she could have narrated
3.APEAL.506.2022
the incident that took place on the first occasion, immediately either to
her mother or to the police. According to him, the incident could very
well have been narrated by the victim to her grandfather and
grandmother, who were residing adjacent to the house of the
appellant.
15. In order to show innocence of the appellant, the learned
counsel further submitted that no attempt was made by PW-1 or her
mother to lodge a report on earlier occasions. The clothes which were
seized during the course of investigation did not show any
incriminating material (semen or blood). According to him, the story
is exaggerated and the appellant was falsely implicated since, on the
one occasion, he had seen the mother of PW-1 in a compromising
position with a person named Ganesh. He further submitted that even
the victim was caught in a compromising position with one Vijay. Since
the appellant had scolded them and showed his anger, the mother of
PW-1 had asked the victim to lodge the false report.
16. A further defense was taken by the counsel for the
appellant that there was a property dispute and, therefore, in order to
protect the interest, a false report was filed. According to him, though
the prosecution had come with the case that the victim was forcibly
3.APEAL.506.2022
taken to Ahmednagar, no attempt was made by the victim to raise hue
and cry or to inform fellow passengers about forcible taking by the
appellant.
17. He further, pointing out to the medical evidence,
contended that there is absolutely no evidence brought on record by
the prosecution to show that the victim had sustained any injuries
either to the anus or to the vagina, which clearly shows that a false
story was advanced. According to him, even though the prosecution
has come with a story that the victim was subjected to forcible
unnatural intercourse, no injury was found to the anus.
18. So far as vaginal intercourse is concerned, the learned
counsel for the appellant submitted that it was not mentioned in the
first information report and, surprisingly, after the examination of all
witnesses, for the first time an application was moved by the victim to
the Court requesting that her statement be recorded.
19. He submitted that the said application was allowed by the
Court and the victim was examined, in which, the for the first time,
she narrated about forcible vaginal intercourse. According to him in
order to cover up the loophole, a doctor was also examined to support
3.APEAL.506.2022
the aforesaid stand taken by the prosecution. According to him, there
is neither any reference to vaginal intercourse in the statement
recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. nor in the statement
recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C.
20. Challenging the medical testimony, he further submitted
that though the victim and the Investigating Officer have stated that
the appellant had sustained a fracture to the leg, the same was not
mentioned by the doctors while examining the appellant. He thus
submitted that the entire story was planted.
21. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, on the
day of incident, i.e., on 20th March 2019, a quarrel and scuffle took
place between between the grandmother of victim and the appellant,
due to which a false case was lodged. He submitted that the doctor,
more particularly, PW-8, had admitted that if there is no erection of the
penis , then there cannot be the commission of act of rape. He further
submitted that the medical evidence was also not believable.
22. Per contra, learned APP submitted that the victim of the
crime was a small child of 13 years. According to her, the victim, in
her examination-in-chief, has stated her date of birth as 06 th October
3.APEAL.506.2022
2006. She further submitted that the age of victim was not seriously
disputed by the defense and, therefore, the provisions of the Act of
2012 were rightly invoked against the appellant. According to the
learned APP, the version of PW-1 is natural and not exaggerated.
23. In order to counter the arguments regarding the delay in
lodging the first information report, learned APP submitted that
considering the age, it can be said that child did not have the maturity
or understanding to such an extent that she would lodge the report
immediately. She further contended that the act committed was of a
heinous nature, since the accused was nobody else but the stepfather
of the victim. She submitted that the trust was betrayed and that the
custodian had, in fact, breached the trust. She further submitted that
though the defense was taken that there was a dispute regarding the
property and, therefore, there was a false implication, no documentary
evidence was produced in that regard. She thus prayed for dismissal
of the appeal.
24. The learned counsel for the victim, Mr. Narwade,
supported the stand taken by the prosecutor and further contended
that the evidence was properly appreciated by the Trial Court and
there is a ring of truth in the case put forwarded by the prosecution.
3.APEAL.506.2022
He submitted that there was no dispute regarding the age, since the
birth extract below Exhibit 33 was admitted by the defense during the
course of the trial. He further submitted that there was absolutely no
reason for falsely implicating the appellant.
RIVAL CONTENTIONS FALL FOR CONSIDERATION :
25. PW-1 is the victim of crime, who, in her examination-in-
chief, has stated that her date of birth is 06 th October 2006. Her birth
date extract is marked below Exhibit 33, and the same was admitted
by the defense during the course of trial. There is, in fact, no serious
suggestion or cross-examination on the part of the appellant while
cross-examining PW-1 to challenge her age. Thus, I come to the
conclusion that, as per Section 2(d) of the Act of 2012, which defines a
child as any person below the age of eighteen years, the victim was a
child, and therefore, the Act of 2012 was rightly invoked in the present
case.
26. PW-1, in her testimony below Exhibit 16, has further stated
that at the relevant time she was studying in 7 th standard and was
residing at Gandhinagar along with the appellant and the real brother,
whereas the mother used to reside at Pune, since there was a quarrel
between the appellant and the mother of PW-1. According to her,
3.APEAL.506.2022
grandparents used to reside in an adjacent house and when she was in
a Balwadi / nursery the appellant used to penetrate his penis into to
mouth of the victim, and therefore, quarrel between the appellant and
the mother of the victim on that count had taken place, which resulted
into beating up the mother of PW-1 by the appellant.
27. She further stated that, prior to two years of giving
complaint, her mother took her and brother Sudhanshu to
Aurangabad; however, the appellant traced them and brought all three
again to his house. Thereafter, the appellant beat the mother of PW-1
and drove her away, but kept the victim and her brother in his house.
She further narrated the incident, stating that the appellant used to
penetrate his penis into her mouth as well as penetrate his penis into
the anus of the victim. She submitted that when she used to shout, the
appellant used to gag her mouth and sometimes used to put cloth into
her mouth, and also threatened her that if the incident was disclosed
to anybody, she would be killed. Due to fear, PW-1 did not disclose the
incident to anybody.
28. PW-1, in her testimony, narrated that on 20th March 2019
at night, she was preparing food, on that day a quarrel had taken place
between the appellant and the grandmother of the victim. After taking
3.APEAL.506.2022
the meal, she went to sleep along with her brother, at which time the
appellant removed her garments, as well as his own clothes, and
penetrated his penis into the anus of the victim, due to which she got
stomach pain. She further deposed that the act resulted into causing
injury to her anus, and when she went to the toilet, she saw that blood
was oozing from her anus, and therefore she started crying. At that
time also, the appellant told her not to disclose the incident to
anybody and threatened to kill her. Therefore, the victim slept by
crying whole night.
29. PW-1 has stated that there was pain in her stomach and,
therefore, she took the mobile phone of the appellant without his
knowledge and rang her mother, to whom the incident was narrated.
Her mother told her to do whatever she wished to desire, whereupon
the victim replied that she would narrate the incident to the police.
30. The victim stated that the school teacher had told her that,
in case of any difficulty, a call could be made on telephone number
100, and therefore, she called the police and narrated the incident.
Consequently, the police visited her house and took her and her
grandmother in their vehicle.
3.APEAL.506.2022
31. She submitted that the narration of the incident resulted in
the lodging of the complaint and registration of the first information
report, which was at Exhibit 17. Thereafter, she was taken to the Civil
Hospital at Ahmednagar for examination. Her clothes were produced
during the course of examination-in-chief and were marked as articles,
so also the clothes of the accused.
32. So far as the cross-examination of this witness is
concerned,various questions were put to the victim in order to show
that not only the spot was surrounded by many houses, but also that
the grandmother and grandfather were residing just adjacent to the
place where the victim was residing. In the cross-examination, it was
also suggested that when she was in the 5 th standard, she had narrated
the incident to the mother, which fact was not disputed by the victim.
33. Further, a defense was sought to be raised that since the
victim and her brother were using a mobile phone for playing games,
they could have telephoned police earlier. Thus, a story was built that
the victim could have very well contacted the police on earlier
occasions and she was also aware of the operation of a mobile phone.
In her cross-examination, she admitted that prior to the incident,
whenever her father went for work, she and her brother used to
3.APEAL.506.2022
accompany the grandmother.
34. It was also admitted by her that prior to one month, the
appellant had sustained a fracture injury as an iron door fell down on
his feet. It was tried to be brought on record by way of cross-
examination that since she was not attending school regularly, the
appellant had scolded her, but the said fact was denied by her. It was
suggested to her that between her house and the house of her
grandfather, a wall was erected and, a window was affixed to it.
According to the learned counsel, therefore, the witness could have
easily narrated the incident or raised a hue and cry on the date of
incident. A suggestion regarding the mother having an illicit
relationship with a person by the name of Avinash was denied by her,
so also the suggestion that the victim was found in a compromising
position.
35. As far as the incident regarding taking of the victim to
Ahmednagar is concerned, the victim admitted that she was in a bus
and did not raise a hue and cry. She stated that when she tried to
open her mouth, a sleeping pill was given to her and therefore she
slept in the ST bus. By advancing the aforesaid version, the accused
contended that the story advanced by the victim was false.
3.APEAL.506.2022
36. It was also admitted by the victim that on the festival of
Holi, a quarrel took place between the grandmother of the victim and
the appellant, which also resulted in a scuffle. It was further admitted
that the appellant picked up a bat and started beating the
grandmother. On the basis of the these admissions, the defense
contended that this was the reason for false implication of the
appellant.
37. In cross-examination, it was also admitted by the victim
that at the police station she was accompanied by her grandmother
and the brother of the appellant. She admitted that the incident dated
20th March 2019 was not narrated by her. She also admitted that in
the statement recorded under Section 164 of Code of Criminal
Procedure, she did not narrate that the appellant had penetrated his
private part into the private part of the victim.
38. If the entire testimony of the victim is perused, it would be
crystal clear that the victim has categorically stated that not only on
20th March 2019, but earlier also , she was subjected to the sexual
intercourse. Just because there is no evidence of vaginal sexual
intercourse in form of medical evidence , it cannot be said that the act
3.APEAL.506.2022
committed by the accused has not been proved.
39. The reason that the prosecution has proved the guilt
beyond the reasonable doubt is that the victim has stated that the
penis was penetrated in her mouth by the accused. If this piece of
evidence is considered in the light of the definition of penetrative
sexual assault, it would be crystal clear that Section 3 of the Act of
2012, which defines "Penetrative Sexual Assault as an act of
penetrating penis, to any extent, into the vagina, mouth ......" ,is
proved by the prosecution. The said offense is then made punishable
under Section 4. I find no reason to disbelieve the testimony of the
said witness, as her testimony is reliable and cogent.
A holistic reading of her testimony would reveal that she
has categorically stated that the act of penetrating penis was done
repeatedly by the appellant. Nothing has been brought on record to
show that there was any reason for false implication. Further in the
peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it is very difficult to
believe that a mother would ask her daughter to falsely implicate a
person by asking victim to state that she was subjected to penetrative
sexual assault. Even otherwise, by way of cross-examination, nothing
was brought on record except suggestions that the mother of the
3.APEAL.506.2022
victim was found in a compromising position, so also the victim
herself.
40. The learned counsel has stated that though the victim was
aware of the operation of a mobile phone and had been using a mobile
phone since long, she did not inform the police about the incident.
Suffice it to say that, considering the age of the victim i.e., 13 years, it
cannot be said that the victim could have gathered the courage
immediately to narrate the incident, either to the police or to her
relative. Disbelieving the evidence of the victim on that ground would
amount to doing injustice to the version advanced by the child witness.
The defense has failed to bring any substantial material on record to
disprove the case of prosecution.
41. Coming to the medical evidence, the victim was first
medically examined on 22/3/19 by PW-2, Dr. Vidya Shingare, who
was working as a Medical Officer at the Civil Hospital, Ahmednagar. .
She stated that the history of the incident was narrated to her, in
which the victim gave a history of multiple episodes of sexual violence
from 2017 till 20th March 2019. She stated that she did not find any
fresh external injuries over the body and/on genitals and/on anal and
peri anal region.
3.APEAL.506.2022
42. She further stated that she, along with Gynecologist Dr.
Narote, examined the victim and found physical injuries on the person
of the victim. She noticed an abrasion approximately 0.5 x 0.5 cm on
left leg, anterior aspect, and swelling approximately 1.5 x 1.5 cm on
left leg, anterior aspect, lower 1/3rd. The genital examination of the
victim girl was conducted. She stated that swelling and redness were
seen over labia majora and minora. Abrasions were present over the
introitus (vaginal opening) at 4 o'clock on left side and on 8 o'clock
position on the right side. Left side 0.4 x 0.3 cm, right side 0.4 x 0.4
cm, and hymen was absent.
43. The said witness stated that there was no bleeding, no
fresh external injuries, tear in anal and peri anal region. She further
stated that blood samples, samples of pubic hairs, nails, vaginal swab
etc., were also collected. PW-2 further stated that since a surgeon was
not available at the Civil Hospital, Ahmednagar, she referred the
patient to Sassoon General Hospital, Pune, for the same. She then
proved the Medico-legal-certificate below Exhibit 22 and the medical
certificate of the victim below Exhibit 23.
44. She deposed that she also received the Medico-legal
3.APEAL.506.2022
examination report of sexual violence from Sassoon General Hospital,
Pune. She stated that pubic hair - tanner stage-I non matted, labia
majora, clitoris, labia minora, urethra - normal, anus perineum -
normal, hymen - multiple old healed tears present. From the history
and clinical examination, she stated that there was evidence of
penetrative vaginal sexual intercourse, with signs of physical injury,
possibly caused by a hard and blunt object, of an age more than 5
days, and simple in nature. According to her, the possibility of oral
and anal intercourse could not be ruled out.
45. This witness was cross-examined. It was suggested to her
that the injury on the private parts, as discussed above, was possible
due to itching and rubbing. The learned counsel thus submitted that it
was due to itching and rubbing, the said injury might have been
caused. I have gone through the medical evidence, so far as the
aforesaid aspect is concerned, suffice it to say that nowhere in the
testimony of PW-1, I could notice that a suggestion was given to the
victim that she had itching or had rubbed her private part; therefore,
the said contention does not support the defense case.
46. As far as the contention of the defense that there was no
injury to the vagina and not even to the mouth, which is admitted by
3.APEAL.506.2022
PW-2, suffice it to say that for proving the offense of rape under I. P. C.
and the offense under Section 4 of the Act of 2012, causing of injury
is not necessary. Absence of injuries on the person of the victim, more
particularly on the private parts, will not absolve the accused.
47. The learned counsel further submitted that while carrying
out the medical examination, it was stated that so far as anus is
concerned, the opinion given was that there was no bleeding,
discharge, tear, oedema and tenderness. According to him, if forcible
sexual intercourse is committed by an adult on a child, there would be
swelling, redness, tenderness etc. He thus submitted that the case is
totally false.
48. It is required to be borne in mind that in the evidence of
the victim, she not only stated about vaginal intercourse but also about
penetration of penis by appellant into the mouth of the victim. The
question of having injuries in such scenario would be difficult, in the
peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.
49. The learned counsel has also stated that no proper test
was conducted by the medical officer to assess the physical
competency of the appellant so as to arrive at a conclusion as to
whether the appellant was in a position to perform sexual intercourse
3.APEAL.506.2022
or not. He further submitted that it has come on record that unless
and until there is an erection of penis, there cannot be sexual
intercourse. Suffice it to say that the definition of penetrative sexual
assault not only speaks about penetration of the penis into the vagina
but also in the mouth. Thus, this piece of evidence is also not helpful
to the appellant / accused.
50. It is further necessary to look into the evidence of PW-7,
who is Dr. Pushpa Narote, who, at the relevant time, was working as a
Gynecologist at the Civil Hospital, Ahmednagar. She stated that on
22nd March 2019, she had medically examined the victim and that
prior to her examination, PW-2 had examined the victim. She
submitted that she had taken a detailed history from the victim and
found the injuries, more particularly as defined in paragraph No.2 of
her examination.
"2. On genital examination, I find swelling, redness seen
over labia, majora and minora. Abrasion present
over introitus (vaginal opening). Position of
Abrasion at 4 O' Clock of left side and at 8 O' Clock
of right side; left side 0.4 x 0.3 cm., and right side
0.4 x 0.4 cm. The hymen was absent."
51. In cross-examination, she stated that the vagina was
healthy and that no injury was seen on the inner aspect of vagina. She
further submitted that vaginal swab, etc., were taken. In cross-
3.APEAL.506.2022
examination, again an attempt was made by the counsel to show that
the age of injury was not mentioned and that there were no injury to
the private parts. Though there was slight redness on labia minora,
the defense contended that it might have been possible due to
irritation from dirt present on the vulva.
52. At the cost of repetition, it is observed that the victim has
not only stated about sexual intercourse through the vagina but also
through the mouth. In that view of the matter, the medical testimony
will not be of much relevance.
53. Now coming to the testimony of PW-5, the said witness, Dr.
Swati Sanap, was serving as a Gynecologist in Sassoon General
Hospital at Pune. She stated that on 27 th March 2019, the victim was
brought to her and was referred by the Civil Hospital, Ahmednagar, for
further opinion and sample collection. The said witness then took a
detailed history and conducted a clinical examination. On
examination, she found that the hymen - multiple old healed hymenal
tears present, and P. V. examination not done. She stated that no
evidence of fresh injury, i.e., scar, sinus, discharge was noted. She
stated about the injuries on the leg and mentioned that from the
history and clinical examination, there was evidence of penetrative
3.APEAL.506.2022
vaginal sexual intercourse with signs of physical injury, possible by a
hard and blunt object, of an age of more than 5 days, and simple in
nature.
54. In cross-examination, a similar line was adopted regarding
the absence of injuries on the vaginal part. As already discussed in
above paragraphs, the definition of Penetrative Sexual Intercourse
mentioned in Section 3 of the Act of 2012 is quite exhaustive which
will cover various types of acts, including the act of penetrating a penis
in the mouth of the victim.
55. PW-3 was the panch who witnessed the recovery of the
clothes of the accused and the victim. Suffice it to say that nothing
was found either on the clothes of the accused or of the victim, and
therefore, the witness can be said to be a formal witness.
56. PW-4 is Dr. Pratik Wagh, attached to Sassoon General
Hospital, who stated that he referred the patient to the psychiatric
department. I have gone through Exhibit 22, which is the Medico-
legal examination report of sexual violence. The history was taken,
and the victim (point No.15(f), which is in tabular form), stated that
the accused had touched her vagina with his finger and tongue. She
3.APEAL.506.2022
also stated in detail about the accused touching her breast.
57. Considering the manner in which the incident had taken
place, and the fact that the accused / appellant is the stepfather of the
victim, I do not find that there was any delay in lodging the first
information report. One cannot forget the fact that the victim was
merely 13 years old at the time of the incident.
58. In the aforesaid background, I come to the conclusion that
the Trial Court has rightly convicted the appellant for the commission
of offense punishable under Section 4 of the Act of 2012, as the
offense of rape has been proved by the prosecution.
59. A brief discussion regarding applicability of Section 376(3)
of the IPC would clear the picture. Section 376 of the IPC punishes the
accused for the commission of rape. Section 376(3) of the IPC states
that whoever commits rape on a woman under sixteen years of age
shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall
not be less than twenty years. It is not disputed by the defense that at
the time of the incident the victim was less than sixteen years;
therefore, the conviction awarded under Section 376(3) of the IPC
cannot be faulted with.
3.APEAL.506.2022
60. Now coming to the conviction under Section 376-C of IPC
is concerned, it is relevant to mention here that said section speaks
about sexual intercourse by a person in authority. It says that whoever,
being in a position of authority or in a fiduciary relationship or ......,
abuses such position or fiduciary relationship to induce or seduce any
woman either in his custody or under his charge or present in premises
to have sexual intercourse with him, such sexual intercourse not
amounting to the offense of rape, shall be punished with rigorous
imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not less than
five years, but which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable
to fine. As there is no evidence to show that victim was either
"induced" or "seduced", the appellant is acquitted for commission of
offense punishable under section 376-C of the IPC.
61. So far as conviction of the appellant under Section 376(2)
(f) of the IPC is concerned, it speaks about the punishment for rape
and further states that whoever, being a relative, guarding or teacher
of, or a person in a position of trust or authority towards the woman,
commits rape on such woman. Admittedly, in this case, the appellant
was the stepfather and thus was a relative and a person in a position of
trust. Thus, this offense stands proved.
3.APEAL.506.2022
62. So far as the conviction of the appellant under Section 377
of the IPC is concerned, the victim has categorically stated about the
act committed by the accused by penetrating his penis into the anus of
the victim. Just because there is no medical injury, it doesn't mean
that the testimony of the victim is required to be ignored. Thus, the
conviction of the appellant is maintained under Section 377 of the IPC.
63. The appellant is also convicted for the commission of
offenses of Criminal Intimidation punishable under Section 506 of the
IPC. The victim has stated that she was threatened that if the act was
disclosed to anybody, she would be killed. Suffice it to say that,
considering the age of the victim and the appellant, it can be said that
the offense under Section 506 of the IPC is also proved.
64. In the aforesaid background following order is passed.
A. Appeal is partly allowed.
B. Appellant is acquitted for the commission of an
offense punishable under section 376-C of IPC.
C. Conviction of appellant for the commission of
offenses punishable under sections 376(3), 376(2)
(f), 377 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and under
3.APEAL.506.2022
Sections 4, 6 and 10 of Protection of Children from
Sexual Offenses Act is maintained.
65. The learned counsel, Mr. Ravindra Narwade, who appeared
for the victim and was appointed through legal aid, has argued the
case in an able manner. He did not even seek any adjournment and
opposed the prayer made by the appellant, and also invited my
attention to various pieces of evidence. His fees be quantified as per
the Rules.
66. In view of the disposal of the appeal, nothing survives in
the criminal application and is accordingly disposed of.
( RAJNISH R. VYAS, J. )
