Bombay HC Upholds Conviction Of School Teacher Accused Of Sexually Assaulting 3 Female Students In Classroom
The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction of a primary school teacher accused of sexually assaulting three female students in his classroom.
The Court was deciding an appeal preferred against the judgment of the Trial Court by which it convicted the teacher for the offences punishable under Sections 354 and 354-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and under Section 7 read with Sections 8, 9(c)(m)(o) read with Section 10 and under Section 11 read with Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).
A Single Bench of Justice Kishore C. Sant observed, “This Court finds that in the present case all the judgments relied upon by the learned Sr. Counsel are applicable. The evidence of the victim girls is found to be reliable. The presence of the accused is not denied. Though the defence is taken of animosity as a motive for false implication, the same does not appear to have been taken from the cross examination & statement under Section 313. This Court finds substance in the arguments and submissions of Learned Senior Counsel for Respondent Nos.2 to 4.”
Advocate Rajesh Khobragade represented the appellant while Senior Advocate Sanjog Parab and APP A.R. Patil represented the respondents.
Factual Background -
The appellant/accused, a teacher in the primary school, committed sexual assault on the victim girls i.e., three female students in the class room by touching their vagina and chest with his hands by making them to lie down on the table and floor. The FIR was registered on December 24, 2021 with Ratnagiri Rural Police Station. After the offence was registered, investigation was conducted, charge sheet was filed and the accused was tried. After trial, the Sessions Court held the accused guilty of the offences and awarded sentences as stated below –
1. Section 7 read with 8 of POCSO Act: Imprisonment of 3 years with a fine of Rs. 2000/-.
2. Section 9(c)(m)(o) read with 10 of POCSO Act: Imprisonment of 5 years with a fine of Rs. 5000/-.
3. Section 11 read with 12 of POCSO Act: Imprisonment of 3 years with a fine of Rs. 2000/-.
Being aggrieved by the aforesaid conviction and sentence, the appellant approached the High Court.
The High Court in view of the facts and circumstances of the case noted, “So far as the case Balaji S/o Dashrath Mundhe (supra) is concerned, this Court at Aurangabad Bench has observed that the deposition of the victim clearly established the act of the accused and nothing was brought on record in support of theory of the defence of false implication. It was further considered that merely because no specific time, date or place of alleged incident is given by the witnesses that by itself would not be sufficient to raise doubt about the prosecution case. It was further considered that the evidence of the witnesses was sufficient to hold the accused guilty, when the foundational facts have been proved beyond reasonable doubt.”
The Court fully agreed with the submissions made by the APP and said that no case is made out pointing out perversity in the judgment of the Trial Court as it had rightly appreciated the evidence and rightly recorded the conviction.
Accordingly, the Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction of the appellant.
Cause Title- Ramesh Ratan Jadhav v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:BHC-AS:23538)
Appearance:
Appellant: Advocates Rajesh Khobragade, Vinay Khobragade, Raj Gupta, Sapna Khobragade, Rahul Yadav, Akash Tayade, and Ayesha Qureshi.
Respondents: Senior Advocate Sanjog Parab, APP A.R. Patil, Advocates Mohan Rao, Sulabha V. Rane, and Sakshi Baadkar.