E-Paper
Chandigarh | Tailor gets 2-year RI for sexually harassing minor girl
As per the prosecution, the convict worked as a tailor and had offered her money to perform sexual acts when she had gone to his shop to get her stepfather’s trousers repaired. The girl immediately walked away and informed her parents about what had happened.
A fast-track court awarded two-year rigorous imprisonment (RI) to a 47-year-old resident of Sector 25D for sexually harassing a nine-year-old girl in 2019. He was also directed to pay a fine of ₹2,000.
As per the prosecution, the convict worked as a tailor and had offered her money to perform sexual acts when she had gone to his shop to get her stepfather’s trousers repaired. The girl immediately walked away and informed her parents about what had happened.
The tailor was arrested the same day and booked under Sections 354A (sexual harassment) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 12 (sexual harassment) of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
During trial, six witnesses were examined by the prosecution. The tailor, in his defence, said he was implicated. He alleged on the morning of incident, the victim’s biological father was crossing his house when he asked him to return some money he had lent him and this had led to an argument between the two. Later in the afternoon, the victim’s family gathered outside his shop and thrashed him and police took him to Government Multi Specialty Hospital (GMSH), Sector 16, for treatment.
The victim’s mother, who was called upon as a witness, said she saw some money with her daughter and found out that it was given to her by her biological father for implicating the accused.
The court observed that the child’s version has remained consistent and credible. It further observed that the version of the defence that the tailor was implicated on insistence of her biological father doesn’t appear convincing as she lives with her mother and stepfather.
A prosecution witnesses, sub-inspector Ajmer Singh also stated that the accused had admitted he had done “something wrong” with the girl and doesn’t want police investigation. This was entered by the IO in the daily diary report, and was the reason why the victim’s family had beaten her up.
While the convict prayed for leniency during pronouncement of quantum of sentence, the court observed, “Sexual harassment in any form is degrading, humiliating and a monumental blow upon the self-respect and self-esteem of the child victim. Thus, the convict who dared to indulge in such an act cannot be heard praying for leniency.”
The court also recommended award of ₹50,000 compensation to the victim by district legal service authority.
The sentence of the convict has been suspended for a month as his application under Section 389 (bail given after conviction) of the Code of Criminal Procedure was allowed, subject to his furnishing of ₹25,000 surety bonds, for him to appeal against the judgment.
