Pocso case: 50-year-old gets 5-year jail term for sexually assaulting minor

A special Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) court has sentenced a 50-year-old city resident to five years imprisonment for sexually assaulting a 10-year-old girl

A special Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) court has sentenced a 50-year-old city resident to five years imprisonment for sexually assaulting a 10-year-old girl. The court refused to show leniency to the convict observing that he was 48-year-old when at the time of the incident.

The special Pocso judge Bharati Kale said incidents like sexually assaulting a minor curtails the liberty of the girl child.

The special Pocso judge Bharati Kale said such incidents curtail the liberty of the girl child and need to be curbed.

According to the special public prosecutor, SS Joshi, the incident took place at around 4.30pm on August 15, 2018. The girl was playing in an open space when the accused dragged her to a nearby autorickshaw and sexually assaulted her. Her uncle had confronted the accused and later approached the police.

Joshi had argued that the prosecution has duly proved its case. She pointed out that the girl had categorically deposed that the accused had committed a sexual assault upon her and she was seen with the accused by her maternal uncle. He added that there was no reason for her to falsely implicate the accused.

The accused through his counsel Anil Jadhav argued that the victim’s uncle is a social worker and he was falsely implicated. There was a quarrel over the parking of vehicles between them and the prosecution had not examined any independent witness.

The statement of the victim was recorded belatedly, said the defence lawyer and added that the friends of the victims who were playing with her are not examined. He also pointed out that there were contradictions and variations in the evidence of witnesses and therefore the accused was entitled to acquittal.

The judge observed that in such cases, witnesses, especially young children are reluctant to come forward and give statements and therefore the defence taken by the accused that despite several children playing nobody had come ahead, cannot be accepted. Also, the accused claimed that there was a parking dispute, however, he could not bring on record any material supporting it. “I find it highly improbable that for the reason of the parking dispute, the future of a 10-year-girl will be put at stake,” said the court while rejecting his claim.