Tripura Shocker: Rape Survivor Alleges Sexual Abuse By Judge In His Chamber Inside Court, Probe Ordered |
The Bombay High Court has upheld the conviction of a 50- year-old man, monikored ‘mama’, for sexually assaulting five girls in the 8-13 age group, over a period of two years.
The court noted that not only the evidence of the minor girls’ inspire confidence, the same is corroborated by medical evidence. The HC was hearing an appeal filed by the man challenging his conviction, claiming that he was falsely implicated.
The sessions court at Vasai, on March 29, 2014, convicted him for sexually assaulting five minors from the same village between 2011 and 2013. He was sentenced to life in prison under the provisions of Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act.
The sessions judge had also directed him to pay a compensation of Rs1 lakh each to four survivors and Rs10,000 to the fifth survivor. According to the prosecution, the man threatened the girls not to disclose the incident to anyone.
However, the incidents came to light when a boy, studying in Class 4, witnessed the man sexually assault a girl (also a Class 4 student). He informed a villager, who in turn informed the girl’s mother.
After the mother lodged a complaint, four other girls too revealed their ordeal. The girls were sent for medical examination, which revealed they were sexually assaulted.
State advocate Gauri Rao submitted that the girls, during their examination revealed how the man called them on the pretext of cle.ng vessels or buying bidi for him, and then exploited them, threatening to beat them and bury them if they informed anyone. She added that their testimony was corroborated by medical evidence and hence mere delay in registering the FIR would not render the evidence suspicious.
Advocate AR Kapadnis, who was appointed as amicus curiae (friend of court), to assist the main complainant, pointed out that the evidence of the girls has gone unchallenged. Defence advocate Laxmi Raman claimed that the man was falsely implicated because of the dispute between him and his brother-in-law on account of agricultural land in Vasai.
The brother-in-law’s daughter was the first complainant in the case. A bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Prithviraj Chavan rejected his claim and upheld the conviction.
