Mumbai: Teenager Gets 15-Year-Old Jail Term For Sexually Assaulting Minor Girl

Mumbai Minor Rape Case: A Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act special court on Friday sentenced a 19-year-old man to 15 years imprisonment for allegedly sexually assaulting a 12-year-old-girl.

As per reports, Judge Priti Kumar Ghule convicted the accused under sections 376 (rape), 354 (assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty) of the Indian Penal Code and under sections 10 (aggravated sexual assault) 4 (Penetrative Sexual Assault) and 8 (sexual assault) of POCSO Act, 2012.

The convict has reportedly pleaded for leniency but the court rejected it. The judge observed that sentencing for any offence has social goals and the accused must realise that "the crime has created a dent in his life and also concavity in the social fabric. "

"Punishment should serve as a deterrent.” The judge also observed that the accused's actions will leave a scar on the mind and body of the survivor. It will be difficult for her to concentrate on her studies and make a good future, the judge said. The court saw that minimum punishment is not appropriate in the case.

The public prosecutor VD More has argued in court that the criminal case dates back to 2019. The survivor has two brothers and her father works as a carpenter. Her family had moved back to their native place after the accused man assaulted the survivor, More said.

The court was informed that the convict called the survivor to his house on several occasions under different pretexts and misbehaved with her. The survivor was dragged to his house one day when he assaulted her. The girl reportedly managed to rescue herself and called for help. Her father along with other locals gathered and thrashed the accused man.

During the hearing, the accused man's lawyer Roshni Singh argued that the only witnesses in the case examined by the prosecution are her family members. Singh said, "The survivor’s statement lacks adequate corroboration and cannot be relied upon and benefit of doubt should be in favour of accused.”

The court ruled, “It is pertinent to note that the offences of rape are in the four walls and the survivor is the best witness.”