Kajheri man gets 20-year jail for rape of minor
The court of additional sessions judge Yashika, dealing with rape and Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) cases, also slapped a ₹51,000 fine on him. The district legal services authority has been directed to pay ₹4 lakh compensation to the victim. The minor had given birth to a baby girl.
As per the prosecution, the convict, a resident of Sector-52, Kajheri village, knew the victim and had taken her to the forest area on the pretext of a walk, in November 2022. There, he raped her and threatened her of dire consequences if she revealed the incident to anyone.
On August 29, 2023, when the victim complained of stomach pain, her mother took her to Government Multi Specialty Hospital, Sector-16, for treatment. There, the doctors confirmed that the victim was pregnant. After this, a complaint was lodged with the police, on the basis of which the accused was arrested.
While passing the order, the court stated that courts are required to be sensitive towards the silent cries of the society and a balance has to be struck between the rights of the accused/convict and the cries of the prosecutrix/victim.
'In the present case, the accused had shown his wicked and evil mind by subjecting a minor victim to penetrative sexual assault. He is liable to be punished sternly,' the court observed.
The court convicted the accused under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, which provides for punishment greater in degree as prescribed under provision of Sections 376(3) (rape) of the Indian Penal Code. He was also found guilty under Section 506 (criminal intimidation) for threatening the victim.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Chandigarh Court pulls up IO for incomplete investigation into POCSO case, rejects report
A Special Fast Track Court in Chandigarh has pulled up a Chandigarh Police Investigating Officer (IO) in a Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) case for filing an 'incomplete investigation report', stating 'the IO in order to wriggle out of his onerous duty has merely recorded the statement of the victim, got her medical examination conducted… and submitted the report by mentioning that accused could not be traced'. Additional District and Sessions Judge Dr Yashika rejected the IO's report in the case and directed the IO to file a complete report under Section 193 of the BNSS after completing all codal formalities. Initially, a missing FIR was registered based on the father's complaint in June that his 15-year-old daughter had been missing. The father later told the police that his daughter returned home in less than a week, following which her medical examination was conducted, her statement was recorded, and she was counselled. On June 15, section 6 of the POCSO Act was added to the FIR. Further, the police on June 25 conducted a raid at the house of the accused, but he could not be apprehended. Meanwhile, as the IO came up with the investigation report before the court, Dr Yashika noted: 'The police submitted a report purported to be under Section 193 of the BNSS, but strangely enough without joining the accused in the investigation or making any endeavour to trace the accused by issuing bailable of non-bailable warrants or proclamation proceedings from the competent court of law.' As per the reply submitted by the IO, the report has been forwarded by the Public Prosecutor and then further sent to the office of the Director, Prosecution, and after his final approval, it is being submitted to the court. On this, the court said, 'The IO as well as higher authorities clearly seemed to have erred in reading and understanding the true spirit of Section 193 of the BNSS, which emphasises early completion of investigation in heinous offences, as the present one. It was never the spirit of the section that, without making any investigation into the offence, an incomplete report should be furnished before the court. On the basis of which the court can practically take no action.' 'The IO in order to wriggle out of his onerous duty, has merely recorded the statement of the victim, got her medical examination conducted, recorded statement of witness and statement of the victim, and submitted the report by mentioning that the accused could not be traced,' the court said. The court said, 'This in no manner can be termed as a report under Section 193 of the BNSS, which sans any investigation vis-a-vis the named accused. The purported report under Section 193 of the BNSS is rejected being incomplete. The IO is directed to file a complete report under Section 193 of the BNSS after completing all codal formalities.'
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Fugitive Aman Pandey, who escaped from Deoria jail in 2022, nabbed in Surat: Uttar Pradesh STF tracks him down; used false identity to evade arrest
LUCKNOW: The Special Task Force (STF) of Uttar Pradesh Police on Wednesday arrested Aman Pandey, a fugitive who escaped from Deoria district jail in December 2022, from Surat, Gujarat. The arrest was made on August 13 at Shiv Shakti Society, Bhathena, under Udhna police station limits in Surat. According to SSP, STF, Ghule Shushil Chandrabhan, Pandey, son of Upendra Pandey and a resident of Baraipur village under Rampur police station, Deoria, was lodged in Deoria jail since December 16, 2022, in connection with rape, kidnapping, and Sections 3/4 of the POCSO Act at Gauri Bazaar police station. On December 29, 2022, he escaped from jail. SSP Ghule said that investigations revealed that on the day of his escape, a man named Upendra visited the jail to meet another inmate. 'When ward staff announced that 'Upendra' had arrived, Aman Pandey falsely claimed that the visitor was his father. Jail personnel escorted him to the visitors' area, where he remained seated until meeting hours concluded. As family members of other inmates were leaving, Pandey mingled with the crowd and walked out unnoticed, successfully breaching the jail's security,' said the SSP STF. Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like The #1 Mistake Tinnitus Sufferers Make Every Night (I Did It for Years) Derila Ergo Undo by Taboola by Taboola A case was registered the same day at Kotwali police station, Deoria, under Sections 223 and 224 of the IPC against him. Since then, Pandey was absconding, moving between Varanasi, Delhi, and Amritsar before settling in Surat under a false identity. The SSP said that the STF's Varanasi field unit was collecting intelligence on fugitives and reward-listed criminals. A team developed credible information that Pandey was hiding in Surat. Acting swiftly, the team conducted a raid and apprehended him from his rented accommodation in the densely populated Shiv Shakti Society locality. Pandey is being produced before a Surat court for transit remand before being brought back to Uttar Pradesh. Further legal action is underway. Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area.
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Five sentenced to life imprisonment in BJP leader's murder case of 2022
A sessions court sentenced five people to rigorous life imprisonment on Wednesday after holding them guilty of murdering BJP leader Sukhbir Khatana in September 2022. The court also acquitted 16 other accused named in the chargesheet by police in the murder case including gangster Vikram Singh alias Papla Gujjar due to lack of evidence against them, said officials aware of the matter adding that Singh will continue to remain lodged in Bhondsi jail in connection with dozens of other criminal cases against him. Khatana, 48, was inside a garment showroom in Sadar bazaar area when armed assailants shot him dead after barging inside the shop on September 1, 2022. The court of additional sessions judge Sunil Kumar Dewan imposed an overall fine of ₹3 lakh on each of the convicts Chaman alias Pawan, Yogesh, Deepak alias Deepu, Ankul and Rahul after sentencing them for life imprisonment under sections 302 (murder) and 120B (criminal conspiracy), two years' imprisonment under Section 201 (disappearance of evidence on an offence) of Indian Penal Code and five years' imprisonment under the Arms Act. Khatana, 48, originally from Rithoj village, was a former vice-chairman of the Sohna marketing committee. He was inside a garment showroom in Sadar bazaar area when armed assailants shot him dead after barging inside the shop in broad daylight on September 1, 2022. Public prosecutor Dhananjay Kumar said that Chaman alias Pawan, who was brother of Khatana's second wife, was the main conspirator in the case. 'Khatana had a love marriage with Chaman's sister, Pushpa, more than 17 years back but her family had not approved it. They had accepted their relationship six years before his murder. However, Chaman still nurtured a grudge against Khatana over the marriage as he used to get humiliated amid his friends for this marriage. This was the prime motive behind the murder which he executed after taking help from henchmen working for the gangster,' said Kumar. Kumar said there were 57 prosecution witnesses of which about two turned hostile but the rest deposed supporting the allegations. 'CCTV footage was clinching evidence in the case which had clearly established that the five convicts were present at the spot and had opened fire on Khatana,' he said. Kumar said ballistic reports also established that the bullets retrieved from the body and the empty cartridges recovered from the spot were fired from the murder weapons recovered on the indications of the convicts. 'Except Chaman, all other convicts were associated with the gangster Papla Gujjar. There were allegations by Khatana's family that he was murdered due to political rivalry in which Chaman was used but no concrete evidence came in the course of trial to establish it,' he added.
