The State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Pradip Balwant Gothaskar
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court rejected the State's application for leave to appeal an acquittal under the POCSO Act. The bench held that the trial court's findings regarding delay and hearsay evidence were not perverse and thus warranted no interference.
What the court decided
YBG
1
als50-15
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPLICATION NO.50 OF 2015
State of Maharashtra ..Applicant - Versus - Dr. Pradip Balwant Gothaskar ..Respondent
Mr.A.R.Patil for State
None for respondents.
CORAM : A.R.JOSHI, J. DATE : 9th JUNE 2015
P.C.
1] Heard learned APP for State – applicant. This is an
application for leave to file an appeal challenging the judgement and order of acquittal of respondent in the matter of offences punishable under section 7 read with sections 8, 9(f) and 10 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short the said Act).
2] The impugned judgement and order was passed by the Special Judge, Pune on 9th January 2015. What weighed with the learned trial court was non examination of about 22 girls then studying in 5th standard in the school. As the allegations against the respondent accused were that he acted in such a manner with the said tender aged girls, which actions were amounting to sexual
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether leave to file an appeal challenging an acquittal order under POCSO should be granted.
Whether the trial court's judgment, based on lack of immediate disclosure and reliance on hearsay, was perverse or contrary to law.
Whether the High Court should interfere with the acquittal of the respondent in the POCSO case.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
State of Maharashtra
- respondent
Dr. Pradip Balwant Gothaskar
Coram
A.R. Joshi
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court