SARFAESI Act | Sale Certificate Cannot Be Issued In Favour Of A Third-Party Nominee Who Was Not The Auction Bidder: Supreme Court SARFAESI Act | Auction Sale Conducted In Violation Of Mandatory Rules And Subsisting Restraint Order Is Vitiated In Law: Supreme Court Recovery Of Alleged Overpayment From A Separate, Unrelated Contract Without Notice Violates Principles Of Natural Justice: Supreme Court IBC | Adjudicating Authority Has Power To Recall CIRP Admission Order If It Was Obtained Through Fraud Or Collusion: Supreme Court Section 138 NI Act | Presumption Of Service Is Attracted Once Notice Is Dispatched To Correct Address Of Drawer: Supreme Court Operation Of Hookah Bars In Restaurants Constitutes Violation Of Rule 4(3) Of COTPA Rules: Allahabad High Court High Court Cannot Recall Order Passed On Merits Even If Passed Ex-Parte: Bombay High Court Administrative Authorities Cannot Pass Orders Having Civil Consequences Without Meaningful Consideration Of The Affected Employee’s Response: Allahabad High Court Discharge Application Cannot Be Converted Into A 'Mini-Trial' To Assess Evidentiary Sufficiency: Andhra Pradesh High Court Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Plaint Must Be Rejected If Allegations Are Falsified By Documents Annexed To Plaint Or Based On Non-Existent Law: Bombay High Court Police Cannot Interfere In Pending Civil Disputes Or Act As Arbitrators In Private Property Conflicts: Andhra Pradesh High Court Contract For Personal Services Between Doctor And Hospital Is Determinable And Not Specifically Enforceable: Calcutta High Court Allegations Of Sexual Offences Cannot Be Quashed Based On Contradictory Evidence Requiring Mini-Trial: Delhi High Court PMLA Adjudication | Failure To Expressly Discuss Every Submission In Written Synopsis Does Not Vitiate Order Under Principles Of Natural Justice: Karnataka High Court Prolonged Separation Of Sixteen Years Constitutes Cruelty Under Special Marriage Act: Kerala High Court Grants Divorce Order XII Rule 6 CPC | Decree Of Possession Can Be Granted On Admissions Even If Relationship Of Landlord-Tenant Is Disputed: Delhi High Court Non-Framing Of Issues Under Order XIV CPC Does Not Vitiate Trial Unless Prejudice Is Proved: Madras High Court Order 47 Rule 1 CPC | Review Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Cure Failure To Produce Evidence That Was Within Knowledge Of Applicant: Madhya Pradesh High Court Codicil To A Will Must Be Proved Like A Will; Propounder Must Remove All Suspicious Circumstances: Punjab & Haryana High Court Mere Lodging Of Section 498-A IPC Case Not Cruelty: Telangana High Court Sets Aside Divorce Decree Order XVII Rule 3 CPC | Power To Dismiss Suit For Default Of Evidence Is Drastic And Must Be Exercised Sparingly: Punjab & Haryana High Court

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