Sexual offences against minors: HC upholds life sentence to Faridabad man, says no respite in cases despite legislation

The Punjab and Haryana high court has upheld the life sentence awarded to a Faridabad man convicted for sexually exploiting his minor daughter on multiple occasions

The Punjab and Haryana high court has upheld the life sentence awarded to a Faridabad man convicted for sexually exploiting his minor daughter on multiple occasions.

The matter had come to light in 2012, when the victim, then aged 14, had reported the matter to her friend’s mother, who took the matter to police. The FIR was registered in October 2012. (iStock)

The high court bench of justice TS Dhindsa and justice Lalit Batra observed that sexual abuse of children is alarming and there is no respite although the legislature has provided stringent punishments for sexual offences after enactment of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

“The innocence of the prosecutrix in the present case, who had barely savoured the first fragrance of childhood, let alone adolescence, was brutally plundered by the appellant… The trauma that the prosecutrix is bound to suffer, on account of the appellant, is bound to be life-long. Thus, in operating the sentencing system, law should adopt the corrective machinery or the deterrence based on factual matrix. By deft modulation sentencing process be stern where it should be, and tempered with mercy where it warrants to be,” the court said, upholding the life sentence awarded by a Faridabad court.

The matter had come to light in 2012, when the victim, then aged 14, had reported the matter to her friend’s mother, who took the matter to police. The FIR was registered in October 2012.

In 2013, he was awarded life sentence. Allegations were that the girl was sexually abused by the father since she was seven years of age. The misdeeds were brought to her mother’s notice but the girl was beaten up and faced abortion on multiple occasions.

The convict was represented by a legal aid counsel in the high court. In his defence, the convict father had argued that he as well as his wife used to object and did not permit the girl to stay at her friend’s house as they were indulging in objectionable and immoral activities.

In collusion with her friend’s mother, the girl registered a false case against him, he claimed. The wife supported the husband’s claims. The appellant, along with his family members (total eight in number), was staying in a one-room accommodation, it was quite improbable that he would commit alleged offence and that too with his daughter, the convict father claimed in high court.

The court, taking note of evidence on record, said there is no rhyme or reason as to why the prosecutrix should depose falsely so as to expose her honour and dignity and also expose the whole family to the society, risking outcast and condemnation by the family circle as well as the society.

“No girl with self-respect and dignity, who is conscious of her chastity, having expectations of a married life and livelihood, would falsely accuse any person of rape, much less against her father, sacrificing thereby her chastity and also expose the entire family to shame and at the risk of condemnation by the society,” the bench added.

Referring to the evidence on record, the court observed that conviction can be on the testimony of the prosecutrix alone unless there are compelling reasons for seeking corroboration. “In the instant case, as prosecutrix was subjected to sexual molestation by her father during her tender age and when she grew up and the misdeeds of her father continued, she made courageous effort to seek legal course for the wrongful act of her father. In this scenario, delay if any, in reporting the matter to the police, has paled into insignificance,” the court said, while dealing with contention that the alleged crime continued for over seven years but was not reported.

“…the appellant has taken undue advantage of the loneliness and haplessness of the minor victim and prosecutrix , who fell prey to his bestiality. Perpetrators of sexual offences on innocent children are psycho-social deviants, who cannot lay any claim to leniency. It is in the order of nature, and is the sacred right of every living being to blossom from infancy, to childhood, to adolescence and, finally, to adulthood. This order of nature is thrown into violent disarray by the sexual predators of children,” the bench said, refusing to interfere with the trial court order and pleas for showing leniency.