HC lauds speedy trial in Pocso case; rejects convict’s appeal

abbas

abbas.dodhiya@htlive.com

HT Image

Mumbai The Bombay high court (HC) recently rejected the appeal filed by a 31-year-old man against his conviction in a Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) case by a special court in 2016. The court also applauded the police’s speedy investigation and the subsequent trial, and said that it was an ideal case of delivering speedy justice.

A single-judge bench of justice Revati Mohite-Dere was hearing the appeal filed by Jitendra Mazi from Bihar, who was convicted for kidnapping and raping a seven-year-old in September 2015.

According to the complaint lodged by the girl’s parents on the intervening night of September 30 and October 1, 2015, the appellant had kidnapped the survivor from Sindhudurgnagari station, where they were sleeping after missing their train. The complaint stated that the appellant took the minor to a forest area and sexually assaulted her. After she returned to the platform, she informed her parents about the incident, following which the station master was alerted.

Mazi was later arrested, and the special Pocso court convicted and sentenced him to 12 years’ rigorous imprisonment.

The court was informed by advocate Nasreen Khalique that her client was falsely implicated in the case at the instance of his employer. Mazi, who worked as the driver of a railway contractor, claimed that his employer had not paid him for three months, as a result of which there was a fight between them, and he was removed from the job.

Khalique argued that the prosecution had failed to establish the identity of her client as being the perpetrator and also challenged the DNA report which showed that the blood found on Mazi’s clothes was that of the minor.

Additional public prosecutor PH Gaikwad-Patil opposed the plea.

After hearing the submissions, justice Mohite-Dere held, “I am of the opinion that no interference is warranted in the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned special judge.”

HC, while appreciating the speedy investigation and trial, observed, “If cases are investigated with diligence, alacrity and promptness – in the manner as aforesaid – and trial conducted in the manner, in which it has, the perpetrators of crime can be brought to book at the earliest. Probably, this case can be used as an `ideal case’, by the police, on how an investigation can be done.”

The judge also warned special courts from falling prey to the slow-motion syndrome, which is lethal to the administration of justice regardless of the ultimate outcome.

The court then directed the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) to compensate the survivor within six months and rejected Mazi’s appeal.