Kashish Jain
The Bombay High Court recently upheld a conviction order and commended the efforts of the Sindhudurgnagari police station and the Special Judge dealing with cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act for completing a POCSO trial within a year, as was mandated under the Act.
Justice Revati Mohite Dere specifically acknowledged the efforts of Special Judge VV Vikar, who completed the trial within a year. She stated that- “The mandate of POCSO Act, to complete the trial within 1 year, duly complied with. Indeed, commendable. Speedy justice is a component of social justice, since the community, as a whole, is concerned with the criminal being condignly and finally punished within a reasonable time and if the criminal is innocent, he/she is absolved from the inordinate ordeal of criminal proceedings. Courts must strive to ensure that cases, do not fall prey to the slow-motion syndrome, which is lethal to the administration of justice, whatever the outcome”
Justice Dere observed in the order. She also lauded the prompt collection of evidence by the Sindhudurgnagari Police Station and
added that this particular incidence can be used as a template by the police in general on how to conduct the investigation. She went on to declare that the investigation, which was completed within a month, was a feat and a rarity.
The Judgement reads: “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”,
Before the High Court was an order convicting the appellant, Jitendra Rajmohan Mazi being challenged. The order convicted the appellant under section 376 (punishment of rape), 363, 366 (kidnapping), and 506 (2) (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code with sections concerning penetrative and aggravated penetrative sexual assault under the POCSO Act.
The Special POCSO judge had convicted and sentenced the appellant to 12 years of rigorous imprisonment for rape, 5 years for kidnapping, and 1 year for criminal intimidation. The sentences were to run concurrently. This order was challenged by Mazi
in the appeal before the High Court.
Advocate Narseen Khalique argued on behalf of Mazi. She pointed that the prosecution failed to attach the identity of Mazi in connection to the crime. She also assailed a DNA report tying the blood found on the appellant’s clothes to the minor victim.
Additional public Prosecutor PH Gaikwad Patil opposed the appeal. He stated that no interference was warranted with the challenged order. He also made it clear the evidence proved beyond reasonable doubt that it was Mazi who had committed the offense.
Justice Dere agreed that no interference was warranted with the order of conviction passed by the Special POCSO judge. She arrived at this conclusion after having gone through the evidence and after having heard the submissions advanced by both the parties to the case.
The Court also awarded compensation to the Minor girl as per the victim compensation scheme. The District Legal Services Authority was directed to complete necessary formalities and award compensation if not done already.