Ahmedabad: A special Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) court in Surat sentenced a 20-year-old Ajay alias Rahul alias Dhiryo Anilbhai Mali to 20 years’ rigorous imprisonment for abducting and sexually assaulting a minor girl.
The judgment was delivered on November 3, by Justice Bhavesh K Awashiya, additional district and sessions judge and special POCSO judge, Surat.
The case dates back to August 23, 2024, when the girl, then below 18 years of age, went missing from her home in Amroli. Her mother told police she returned after visiting a relative and the girl could not be traced in the neighbourhood, so a complaint was lodged at Amroli police station.
An FIR was registered under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and sections 3, 4, 5(L) and 6 of the POCSO Act. During investigation, police traced the girl and the man.
The investigation showed that he took her from Surat to Ahmedabad, then to Viramgam, and later to Surel village in Dasada taluka of Surendranagar district. They stayed in a hut near a house of his relative.
According to the prosecution, led by special assistant public prosecutor D.V. Dave, the convict, a scrap-dealer, developed a relationship with the girl, who lived near his residence. The convict convinced the minor to leave with him by promising marriage and took her to Surel village, according to court documents. The survivor remained with the convict at a relative’s farm in Surel village for approximately one month.
{{/usCountry}}According to the prosecution, led by special assistant public prosecutor D.V. Dave, the convict, a scrap-dealer, developed a relationship with the girl, who lived near his residence. The convict convinced the minor to leave with him by promising marriage and took her to Surel village, according to court documents. The survivor remained with the convict at a relative’s farm in Surel village for approximately one month.
{{/usCountry}}During this period, the convict claimed to have married the survivor at a temple and engaged in sexual relations with her multiple times.
The court noted that medical examinations of both the convict and the survivor were conducted. Doctors testified that physical relations had occurred between the two individuals.
The survivor’s birth certificate confirmed she was a minor at the time of the incident. The prosecution relied on the survivor’s statement, her age documents and other evidence collected during investigation. The court noted that her testimony was credible and did not require further corroboration.
“The survivor in this case is a minor. By fleeing away with a minor, marrying her and under the false pretext of a love relationship, establishing sexual relations to satisfy his desire, the convict has committed a serious offence. If a lenient sentence is imposed, it would defeat the purpose of the law, which is to prevent such offences and to make the offender aware of the consequences under law. Therefore, to ensure that anyone who thinks of having sexual relations with a minor girl understands the law and refrains from such conduct, it is necessary to impose the maximum punishment and fine prescribed for the offence,” the judge observed.
The convict was sentenced under BNS sections 137(2) (kidnapping a minor), 87 (enticement for marriage), 64(2)(i)(m) (aggravated rape), and POCSO sections 3, 4, 5(l) and 6.
In addition to imprisonment, the court ordered the convict to pay a compensation of ₹6 lakh to the survivor under the Gujarat Victim Compensation Scheme, 2019. The court directed that 80 percent of this amount be placed in a fixed deposit for three years in the survivor’s chosen nationalised bank.