Renewal Is Not Extension Unless Terms Are Fixed in Same Deed: Bombay High Court Strikes Down ₹64.75 Lakh Stamp Duty Demand on Nine-Year Lease Fraud Vitiates All Solemn Acts—Appointment Void Ab Initio Even After 27 Years: Allahabad High Court Litigants Cannot Be Penalised For Attending Criminal Proceedings Listed On Same Day: Delhi High Court Restores Civil Suit Dismissed For Default Limited Permissive Use Confers No Right to Expand Trademark Beyond Agreed Territories: Bombay High Court Enforces Consent Decree in ‘New Indian Express’ Trademark Dispute Assam Rifles Not Entitled to Parity with Indian Army Merely Due to Similar Duties: Delhi High Court Dismisses Equal Pay Petition Conspiracy Cannot Be Presumed from Illicit Relationship: Bombay High Court Acquits Wife, Affirms Conviction of Paramour in Murder Case Bail in NDPS Commercial Quantity Cases Cannot Be Granted Without Satisfying Twin Conditions of Section 37: Delhi High Court Cancels Bail Orders Terming Them ‘Perversely Illegal’ Article 21 Rights Not Absolute In Cases Threatening National Security: Supreme Court Sets Aside Bail Granted In Jnaneshwari Express Derailment Case A Computer Programme That Solves a Technical Problem Is Not Barred Under Section 3(k): Madras High Court Allows Patent for Software-Based Data Lineage System Premature Auction Without 30-Day Redemption Violates Section 176 and Bank’s Own Terms: Orissa High Court Quashes Canara Bank’s Gold Loan Sale Courts Can’t Stall Climate-Resilient Public Projects: Madras High Court Lifts Status Quo on Eco Park, Pond Works at Race Club Land No Cross-Examination, No Conviction: Gujarat High Court Quashes Customs Penalty for Violating Principles of Natural Justice ITAT Was Wrong in Disregarding Statements Under Oath, But Additions Unsustainable Without Corroborative Evidence: Madras High Court Deduction Theory Under Old Land Acquisition Law Has No Place Under 2013 Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Enhances Compensation for Metro Land Acquisition UIT Cannot Turn Around After Issuing Pattas, It's Estopped Now: Rajasthan High Court Private Doctor’s Widow Eligible for COVID Insurance if Duty Proven: Supreme Court Rebukes Narrow Interpretation of COVID-Era Orders Smaller Benches Cannot Override Constitution Bench Authority Under The Guise Of Clarification: Supreme Court Criticises Judicial Indiscipline Public Premises Act, 1971 | PP Act Overrides State Rent Control Laws for All Tenancies; Suhas Pophale Overruled: Supreme Court Court Has No Power To Reduce Sentence Below Statutory Minimum Under NDPS Act: Supreme Court Denies Relief To Young Mother Convicted With 23.5 kg Ganja Non-Compliance With Section 52-A Is Not Per Se Fatal: Supreme Court Clarifies Law On Sampling Procedure Under NDPS Act MBA Degree Doesn’t Feed the Stomach: Delhi High Court Says Wife’s Qualification No Ground to Deny Maintenance

20 Years' jail For 5 Men Who Gangraped School Teacher : Bombay HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Recently, The Bombay High Court upheld the conviction and 20 years of rigorous imprisonment of five men who posed as policemen, kidnapped a 21-year-old schoolteacher, and raped her [Ashwin s/o Ashok Donode & others vs. State of Maharashtra].

A divisional bench composed of Justices Sunil Shukre and Govind Sanap determined that this was not a case of false implication, as the accused had claimed when they claimed to be at odds with the victim.

"The unfortunate victim in her prime of life was subjected to a vicious assault by the accused. Her womanhood, pride, prestige, and dignity were violated based on how she was treated during the incident. The accused individuals indulged their lust in a disgraceful manner. The accused took advantage of the circumstance, "court stated.

The bench was seized of criminal appeals filed by Ashwin Donode (28), Anil Ingle (35), Roshan Ingle (35), Pundlik Bhoyar (34), and Mohammad Afroz Pathan (38) on October 23, 2018 against the order issued by a sessions court in Nagpur.

All of them were convicted by the sessions court on charges of gangrape (376D), kidnapping (366), common intent (34) and criminal intimidation (506) under the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

According to the prosecution, the victim, a teacher at a convent school, and a male friend were standing near a highway in Nagpur at approximately 8 p.m. on December 1, 2014, when the accused, who were on their bikes, stopped and asked what she and the boy were doing on the highway.

They pretended to be police officers. When she asked to see their identification cards, the men forced her to sit on her motorcycle and made her friend sit on another motorcycle. They then threatened them with a knife and demanded cooperation.

Sensing danger, her friend fled and ran to a nearby police station for assistance, but the girl had already been taken to a forest area and raped.

In its order, the court noted that the victim's testimony was credible because she had described the incident in detail and remained steadfast on her statements under cross-examination.

It was noted that the victim was able to identify all of the accused because she had seen them from the light of their bicycles as they assaulted her.

The court also noted that one of the defendants, Bhoyar, was unable to engage in sexual activity with the victim due to a fractured leg. However, he was convicted because his sperm was discovered in the victim's cervix.

"It should be noted that in such a state of fear, the victim may not have felt the penetration. However, a positive DNA report indicates that the accused also had a penetrating sexual encounter with the victim; otherwise, his sperm would not have been detected in the victim's cervix "Judges observed.

Regarding the defendant's claim that the victim did not sustain any injuries, the court reasoned that she would have been defenceless and thus submitted.

"On the basis of the victim's vivid firsthand account of the incident, one can visualise the victim's precarious position in the custody of the accused. The perpetrator had been threatened with dire consequences if she did not submit to their lust. Two minor injuries were present on her back. Major injuries may not have occurred because the victim was defenceless and unable to resist. The only option available to the victim was to comply with the demands of the accused "The bench expressed its opinion.

The court also considered the DNA results that linked all five suspects to the crime.

C R Thakur and S R Shinde represented the defendants in court.

S S Doifode, an assistant public prosecutor, represented the state.

D.D:20-07-2022

Ashwin s/o Ashok Donode & others Vs State of Maharashtra

Latest Legal News