Hausiram Baban Pardhi v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC9 Dec 2020BA/142/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application rejected. The court held that consent is immaterial in offences under the POCSO Act involving minors. Despite the applicant's incarceration for over three years and lack of external injuries on the victim, the nature of the offence warrants rejection of bail.

What the court decided

AI extract

¶1

1/4 28 BA-142-20.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

Mandira Salgaonkar

¶4

Digitally signed by Mandira Salgaonkar Date: 2020.12.11 20:49:18 +0530

¶5

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.142 OF 2020

¶6

Housiram Baban Pardhi .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent …

¶7

Mr.Sachin Pawar for the Applicant.

¶8

Mr.S.V.Gavand, APP for the State.

¶9

CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J.
 DATED : 9th DECEMBER, 2020

¶10

P.C:-

¶11

1.The applicant aged 32 years is charge-sheeted for the
offence punishable under Sections 363, 366-A, 376 of the
Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 4, 7 and 8 of the
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

¶12

Hausiram Baban Pardhi Vs the State of Maharashtra — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2020)

A missing complaint was lodged by the father of the
victim girl on 14th May, 2017 alleging that his daughter
aged 16 years is missing. In-spite of the search in the
nearby locality and inquiry from the relatives and friends,
she could not be traced. Offence was, therefore, registered
under Section 363 of IPC. Thereafter on 16th August, 2017,
the victim girl was found in the company of the present
applicant and they were residing in one small hutment at

¶16

2.The statement of the victim girl is recorded on 16th
August, 2017 and her age is mentioned as 17 years 4
months. She has stated that on 22nd April, 2017, the
applicant had been to her house and he lured her with
promise of marriage and she eloped with him. They sought
rescue in the house of one of their friends and on the same
night, he forcibly committed sexual intercourse with her.
Thereafter till the date of recording her statement, on 4 to
5 occasions, he had forced himself upon her.

¶17

3.The learned counsel for the applicant has invited my
attention to the statement of the member of Mahila
Dakshata Samiti, who was present when the victim girl was
brought to the police station and when she gave her
statement to the police. The said witness has stated that
the victim girl had been to the friend’s house alongwith the
applicant. She was kept there like his wife. When he
attempted to establish physical relationship, she protested
on the ground that she is minor and she will not permit the
relationship unless and until the marriage is performed. At
that time, she reported that the applicant said that he

¶20

would marry with her and performed sexual intercourse
with her on 4 to 5 occasions. The learned counsel has also
placed reliance on the medico legal examination of the
victim at the Rural Hospital, Narayangaon, Taluka Junnar.
After recording the history given by the victim as sexual
assault by accused during the period ranging from 22nd
April, 2017 to 15th August, 2017 and that the victim girl
was residing with the accused during the said period, the
opinion expressed by the Medical Officer is to the following
effect :

¶22

The counsel has invited my attention to the proforma
where no injuries are noted on the body of the victim. As
far as the injuries on her private parts are concerned, it
record that no external injuries are seen. No perineal tear
is recorded and as far as the position of hymen and tear is
concerned, it is reported in the negative.

¶23

4.The medical examination is in the nature of
corroboration and there is no reason why the statement of
the prosecutrix cannot be believed when she narrated that
under the pretext of marriage, she was lured to elope with
the applicant and was subjected to the forcible sexual

¶26

intercourse. It is informed by the learned APP Mr.Gavand
that the applicant is already married and having two
children. In the backdrop of the said fact, the submission
of the learned counsel for the applicant that there was a
love relationship cannot be accepted at this stage.
Undisputedly, the applicant is incarcerated for more than
three years, but looking into the nature of his involvement
into an offence under the POCSO Act where the consent of
the minor girl is immaterial, the application deserves
rejection and is accordingly rejected.

Hausiram Baban Pardhi v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Santosh Babu Lamani and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Santosh Babu Lamani and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ranu Maruti Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Baban Balu Mengale and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Hausiram Baban Pardhi v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Santosh Babu Lamani and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Santosh Babu Lamani and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ranu Maruti Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Baban Balu Mengale and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

A compact analysis

Roshan Nandkumar Shinde Vs the State of Maharashtra

Pritam @ Bikshu Nandu Avatare Vs the State of Maharashtra