Trigger Warning: This post contains the detail about Child Sexual Assault. Readers’ discretion required.
In recent times, the regressive rulings by the Bombay High court left many netizens disappointed. From ruling about groping a minor’s breast without skin to skin contact, holding a girl’s hands, or unzipping the pants isn’t considered as sexual assault in the POCSO act.
Now, sadly one more ruling by the same judge surfaced over the internet, which once again initiated the debate on the internet.
On January 17, the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court heard the case of 26-year-old Suraj Kasarkar who had challenged his rape conviction (and sentence of 10 years of rigorous imprisonment) by a sessions court. During this appeal, the accused claimed that the intercourse with the 15-year-old victim was consensual and she was “habituated to sexual acts”.
While sharing the details, The Times of India quoted Justice Pushpa Ganediwala,
“It seems highly impossible for a single man to gag a survivor’s mouth, remove her and his clothes, and perform the forcible sexual act without any scuffle. Had it been a case of forcible intercourse, there would have been a scuffle. Medical evidence also doesn’t support the survivor’s case as no injuries from a scuffle could be seen.”
Finally, the court acquitted the man convicted under POCSO Act. As per the court ruling:
“The defence of consensual physical relations does appear probable. The accused could bring on record the probable doubt with regard to consensual relation. The girl admitted that she wouldn’t have lodged a complaint if her mother hadn’t arrived.”
“The sole testimony of the prosecutrix in rape cases is sufficient to fix criminal liability against the accused. However, considering the substandard quality of the girl’s testimony, it would be a grave injustice to send the petitioner behind bars for 10 years. The prosecution miserably failed to fix criminal liability of rape against him by criminal trespassing in the survivor’s house.”
The judgment sparked a discussion online about the acquittal.
Don’t forget to let us know what do you think about this judgment!