E-Paper
60-year-old man gets 20 years for rape of minor
The court also sentenced Khan to five years’ rigorous imprisonment under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. Both sentences will run concurrently
Prefer HTon Google
A Pimpri district and additional sessions court has sentenced 60-year-old Karim Kadar Khan of Pawar Vasti in Dapodi to 20 years’ rigorous imprisonment for raping a seven-year-old girl in Dapodi in 2022.
The court also sentenced Khan to five years’ rigorous imprisonment under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. Both sentences will run concurrently. The court imposed a fine of ₹25,000 for each offence, with six months’ rigorous imprisonment in default of payment of each fine.
The judgment was pronounced on September 5 by Additional Sessions Judge and District Judge-2, Pimpri, Kavita D Shirbhate, in a special (child protection) case arising from an FIR registered at Bhosari police station. Khan has been in custody since September 20, 2022, and was granted set-off for the period already spent in jail.
According to the prosecution, the girl was playing outside her house when Khan allegedly called her to his home on the pretext of giving her chocolate. When the girl could not be found, her mother began searching for her. She told the court that she saw the child’s footwear outside Khan’s house and heard her screaming. On entering, she found Khan and the child inside.
The girl later told her mother about the assault, following which the family approached the police.
The court relied on the child’s testimony, noting that she identified Khan during the trial and consistently described the assault. The prosecution also said the girl had told the court that similar acts had allegedly occurred on four earlier occasions and that she had been threatened against disclosing them. The court found that the defence had failed to discredit her testimony on material aspects. Medical evidence also supported the prosecution case. The chemical analyser’s report recorded human blood and semen stains on several articles seized during the investigation.
The defence claimed Khan had been falsely implicated and pointed to discrepancies in the timing of the police complaint and medical examination. It also suggested that a dispute with the child’s father could have led to a false case. The court rejected the arguments.
The defence sought leniency citing Khan’s age, while the special public prosecutor sought the maximum punishment, citing the victim’s age and the gravity of the offence.
