Children Easy Targets, Lack Words To Explain Ordeal: Gujarat High Court Denies Probation To Convicts Who Molested Teenage Girls
The Gujarat High Court has upheld the conviction of two men for outraging the modesty of two teenage girls and rejected the accused's plea for probation observing, that perpetrators with such criminal mentality specifically target children because they can be easily intimidated.The court also referred to the IO's report which said that on very few occasions would the victim's father...
The Gujarat High Court has upheld the conviction of two men for outraging the modesty of two teenage girls and rejected the accused's plea for probation observing, that perpetrators with such criminal mentality specifically target children because they can be easily intimidated.
The court also referred to the IO's report which said that on very few occasions would the victim's father support lodging an FIR, as it is felt that to report such incidents would bring "bad fame to girls and their family".
Justice Nisha M Thakore in her order said:
"Having noted the aforesaid observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court bearing in mind the fact that the present applicants are found convicted for the offense punishable under Section 354 of Indian Penal Code, which is in fact, a crime against the woman, considering the nature of offence against victims who were hardly in their early teenage years, barely 17 and 18 years respectively, no relief of probation can be granted to the accused.
As rightly explained by the Investigating Officer, on very few occasions the father of the victim would support lodging an FIR as it would always be looked upon as a trivial incident and to report such incidents would bring bad fame to girls and their family. In fact, the reports suggest that the perpetrators with such criminal mentality specifically targets minors because children are easily intimidated and lack the words to understand what is happening. They are terrified to fight back or to even share their ordeal with the parents".
The court was hearing a plea challenging sessions court order which upheld conviction of two men under Sections 354 (assault or use of force with intent to outrage woman's modesty) and 114 (abettors present when an offense is committed) IPC, while modifying sentence of two years rigorous imprisonment to one year simple imprisonment. The high court had in 2019 stayed the sentence pending hearing and final disposal of the revision application.
The prosecution alleged that the on December 27, 2008, at around 8:00 hours in the morning, the victim along with her cousin sister had left their house to fetch drinking water from the village Gaushala situated on the opposite side of the river. The two accused, Rajeshbhai and Naresh @ Dakubhai followed them on a motorcycle and whistled, winked at the victim.
They intercepted their path and made a vulgar solicitation by saying, "what is your wish today? Come, let us fulfill it." When the victim rejected their approach, the accused stopped their motorcycle and physically grabbed her left arm. The victim and her cousin sister immediately raised a loud alarm. As a result, the accused persons fled.
The high court noted that both the original informant and the cousin sister had entered the witness box and had recognized and identified the accused persons. The court said that the prosecution had miserably failed to show any contradictions to the victims' testimonies.
"The trial Court has appreciated the core narratives which have remained entirely unshaken during their cross-examination. The learned Magistrate has found force in the explanation given by the primary victim and her eyewitness cousin sister that despite having domestic tap connections, they had to approach the Gaushala to fetch soft drinking water...Even otherwise, the legal principle is settled that in such cases, if the Court finds that the core evidence of the sole prosecutrix remains unshaken, the same itself is sufficient to convict the accused," the court said.
The high court found no error in the trial court and upheld the conviction and also dismissed the accused's prayer for probation.
Rejection the plea, the court directed the accused to surrender within 8 weeks.
Case title: RAJESHBHAI ASHOKBHAI GOHEL (LUHAR) & ANR. v/s STATE OF GUJARAT
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION) NO. 73 of 2019