A special POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences) court in Pune on Monday convicted a 62-year-old security guard for sexually assaulting a minor girl while she was feeding stray dogs near her residential society in Kondhwa.
Special Judge Sagar Ramesh Agrawal convicted accused Ramkishor Ramratan Yadav under Section 75(1)(i) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Section 7 of the (POCSO) Act. Yadav was sentenced to three years’ rigorous imprisonment and fined ₹5,000. In case of default in payment, he will undergo an additional month of rigorous imprisonment.
According to the prosecution, on August 5, 2025, at 10pm, the girl and her mother were feeding dogs on the street when the accused allegedly called out to the minor, pretending he had leftover food for the animals. When she approached him, Yadav allegedly pulled her toward him and pressed her breasts. He also asked for the mother’s phone number. The frightened girl did not immediately tell her mother about the incident.
The next evening, the accused allegedly called the mother and asked when the girl would come downstairs to collect leftover food for the stray dogs. It was after this call that the minor disclosed the previous night’s incident to her mother, following which they approached the police and an FIR was registered.
{{/usCountry}}The next evening, the accused allegedly called the mother and asked when the girl would come downstairs to collect leftover food for the stray dogs. It was after this call that the minor disclosed the previous night’s incident to her mother, following which they approached the police and an FIR was registered.
{{/usCountry}}The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed that he had been falsely implicated. One of the principal arguments raised by the defence was that the girl had not immediately disclosed the incident to her mother and that the complaint was lodged a day later.
The court, however, held that the minor girl’s evidence was reliable and trustworthy. It noted that the victim explained she was frightened and lacked the courage to immediately tell her mother about the incident.
“The fact that the victim did not immediately disclose the incident to her mother does not, by itself, render her testimony unreliable. In the context of an offence of this nature, particularly where the victim is a minor girl, the mere fact of delayed disclosure cannot be treated as a circumstance which automatically renders the prosecution case doubtful,” the judge said.
The defence suggested that the physical contact may have occurred accidentally while the girl was feeding dogs and the accused was attempting to drive the animals away.
In response, the court said that sexual intent need not always be established through direct evidence of the accused’s state of mind; it could be inferred from the nature of the act, the part of the body touched, the manner in which the act was committed, and the surrounding circumstances.
“The act of pulling the victim toward himself and pressing her breast cannot reasonably be characterised as accidental contact given the circumstances proved on record,” the judge observed.
Rejecting the defence argument that the absence of an independent eyewitness weakened the prosecution’s case, the court observed that sexual offences can occur where independent witnesses might not be present and the crucial question was whether the victim’s testimony was trustworthy. Saying this, the court ruled in favour of the minor survivor and convicted the 62-year-old accused.