By Astha Bhumish Shah 

The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction of an accused in a POCSO case observing that the family of the victim had no reason to falsely implicate the accused considering that reporting of sexual offences brings disrepute to the family. In the present case it was alleged that, the victim who was in the fifth standard at the time of the incident, had gone to her friend’s house where the accused who was the friend’s father, took advantage of the situation and called her near him and committed the “shameful act” of pressing her legs and breasts and asking her to touch a part of his body after opening his zip. The accused was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years for the offence under Section 9(m) punishable under Section 10 of the POCSO Act and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years for the offence punishable under Section 8 of the Act. However, it was alleged by the defence that the accused was falsely implicated in the case on the account of enmity with the parents of the victim. It was explained by the Court that the conduct of the victim was not unnatural as she must have been taken aback on account of such a “shameful act” by a father figure. 

The Court noted there were no inconsistencies or discrepancies in the evidence presented by the mother of the victim as to the occurrence of the incident as narrated by the victim. It further stated that even if it were to be assumed for the sake of argument that there was enmity between the accused and the parents of the victim, the parents would not jeopardize the future of their daughter. Consequently, the Court upheld the decision of the Trial Court and held that the conviction of the accused on the basis the present evidence is justified. There is no reason to interfere with the well-reasoned judgment and order passed by the Sessions Judge. (Vinod v. State of Maharashtra – Criminal Appeal (APEAL) No. 333 of 2023) 

Click here to read/ download the Order.