30-04-2025
Gujarat POCSO court awards life term to man for raping biological daughter
'Safety and security don't just happen; they are the result of collective consensus and public investment', a Special POCSO Court in Mehsana district said on Wednesday quoting Nelson Mandela, as it awarded 'life imprisonment till the last breath' to a 45-year-old man for raping his 15-year-old biological daughter mutliple times.
Stating that the case falls within the ambit of heinous crimes, the court of Special POCSO Judge Mehsana, Sarang Kale, said on Wednesday, 'The accused has committed rape on his real daughter. If a man with such a mentality (is) allowed to live in society, no girl or lady will be safe. So the accused must be awarded the maximum punishment in terms of sentence, i.e. imprisonment for life till the last breath.' The court also imposed a fine of Rs 15,000 on the convict.
The FIR in the case was lodged in April 2024 while charges were framed in June and the trial commenced on July 18 last year. As per the arguments put forth by Mehsana district government pleader V B Barot, the man's wife, who is the victim's mother, had approached the police in April 2024 after the younger sibling of the victim informed her about their father 'dragging the elder sister to the upper floor and locking the room'.
The victim had then confided in her mother that her father had allegedly forced himself upon her seven or eight times and also regularly showed her objectionable videos. The prosecution informed the court that the victim had also confided in the complainant that the accused had threatened to kill her and the family, to stop her from telling anything to her mother. The prosecution case further stated that as the complainant took the two daughters with her to work the following day, the accused called, asking her to return immediately and threatened to kill all of them. The complainant then went to Bharuch to one of their relatives' house and returned to Mehsana two days later to file the complaint.
The accused was booked under IPC Sections [376(2)(f)(n)] (rape by relative, guardian or a person in position of trust; multiple rape on the same victim), 376(3) (rape on a woman under 16 years of age), 506(1) (Criminal intimidation) and under sections of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. The court examined a total of 10 witnesses and 20 documentary pieces of evidence in the case.
The court order states that the accused, during his trial, denied the case of the prosecution and claimed that he was being falsely implicated, but did not put up any defence against the charges.
Considering the submissions of the prosecution as well as the witnesses and the medical evidence that showed the victim had been sexually assaulted by the accused, the court said, 'This is a very unique and serious kind of a case. This court has come across so many cases under the POCSO Act. So many cases are decided by this court. But this is a very unfortunate moment that this court had to try this case where an accused under POCSO Act is the real father of the victim girl. While enacting POCSO Act, the Legislature could also have had no reason to think that any father can be an accused under POCSO Act for raping his real daughter. This court has no words to describe its anguish against the heinous act of this accused.'
The court further said that to escape from the charges leveled against him, the accused even tried to 'prove that his daughter is not of good character' and also made alleged that his wife was involved in an affair with another man.
The court said, 'It was marked by this court that no signs of sorrow or repentance were there in the body language of the accused. Not only this, during the period of trial when he was brought to the court from jail, he somehow managed a mobile phone and called the victim on her number before she was going to depose in the court. By calling the victim, the accused tried to emotionally influence the victim… As a result, the responsible police officer was also suspended. This court is speechless and really shocked to come across such kind of case.'
Noting the 'emotional trauma' experienced by the two daughters, especially the victim, the court said, 'Accused has not only threatened victim but has also threatened her younger sister. This court is really worried about the future of this victim girl…'
Invoking Article 45 of the Constitution, which recognises the importance of dignity and personality of the child, the court said, 'We live in a society where the safety and security of children remain an unfulfilled promise… The society… needs a system which takes care of the social milieu in which girls and women are safer…'
The court also granted a compensation of Rs 5 lakh to the victim under the Gujarat Victim Compensation Fund.
