A court in Noida, Gautam Buddha Nagar district, has sentenced a man to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment for raping a minor girl and five years of rigorous imprisonment for kidnapping her with the intention of forcing her to marry him. .
Both the sentences will run concurrently, according to the order of Special POCSO Court Judge (First) Vikas Nagar, who also imposed a fine of Rs 55,000 on the convict.
Mohit, a resident of Greater Noida, was accused of kidnapping and then raping a 16-year-old girl in April 2017. An FIR under sections 363, 366 and 376 was registered at the Dankaur police station at that time in connection with the case. Provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and POCSO Act.Both the accused and the victim are from the same village.
While defense counsel Naresh Chand Gupta prayed for minimum punishment for the accused saying he was the only earning member of his poor family and had no criminal history, special public prosecutor Jai Prakash Bhati sought no leniency and Argued for the maximum sentence because it is "too much". Serious crime against a minor.
"On careful critical examination and appreciation of the evidence produced by the prosecution, this Court comes to the conclusion that the evidence produced is sufficient to prove that accused Mohit kidnapped the minor victim at 11.30 am on April 3, 2017. So that she can be forced to marry or have illicit relations." had sexual intercourse with her and also committed the crimes of rape and penetrative sexual assault, Judge Nagar said in the order passed on Friday.
“In conclusion, the offenses alleged against accused Mohit i.e. Sections 366, 376 IPC and Section 4 POCSO Act are proved beyond reasonable doubt.Therefore, accused Mohit is liable to be convicted of these offences. “As far as the offense charged under Section 363 is concerned, since this offense is subsumed into another offense charged under Section 366 IPC, therefore, the accused is liable to be acquitted in the offense under Section 363 IPC,” he said.
Accordingly, the judge ordered that the convict be sentenced to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 50,000 for an offense under Section 4 of the POCSO Act and in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo additional simple imprisonment for six years. Month.
Judge Nagar said the convict was also sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 5,000 for an offense under Section 366 of the IPC and in default of payment of the fine, he would have to undergo additional simple imprisonment of three months.
The judge ordered, “The period spent by the convict in jail during the trial will be adjusted in the original sentence awarded to him.Both the original sentences will run concurrently."
"Under the provision of Section 357 of the CrPC, 85 per cent of the fine imposed on the convict will be paid to meet the rehabilitation expenses of the victim," he said.
During the hearing of the case, the court also found discrepancy regarding the age of the victim, with her father claiming that she was 13 years old at the time of the incident, while her educational certificate and medico legal report stated her age to be around 16 years. . Old.
However, the court said that in any case, the victim was a minor at the time of the crime against her.
Both the sentences will run concurrently, according to the order of Special POCSO Court Judge (First) Vikas Nagar, who also imposed a fine of Rs 55,000 on the convict.
Mohit, a resident of Greater Noida, was accused of kidnapping and then raping a 16-year-old girl in April 2017. An FIR under sections 363, 366 and 376 was registered at the Dankaur police station at that time in connection with the case. Provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and POCSO Act.Both the accused and the victim are from the same village.
While defense counsel Naresh Chand Gupta prayed for minimum punishment for the accused saying he was the only earning member of his poor family and had no criminal history, special public prosecutor Jai Prakash Bhati sought no leniency and Argued for the maximum sentence because it is "too much". Serious crime against a minor.
"On careful critical examination and appreciation of the evidence produced by the prosecution, this Court comes to the conclusion that the evidence produced is sufficient to prove that accused Mohit kidnapped the minor victim at 11.30 am on April 3, 2017. So that she can be forced to marry or have illicit relations." had sexual intercourse with her and also committed the crimes of rape and penetrative sexual assault, Judge Nagar said in the order passed on Friday.
“In conclusion, the offenses alleged against accused Mohit i.e. Sections 366, 376 IPC and Section 4 POCSO Act are proved beyond reasonable doubt.Therefore, accused Mohit is liable to be convicted of these offences. “As far as the offense charged under Section 363 is concerned, since this offense is subsumed into another offense charged under Section 366 IPC, therefore, the accused is liable to be acquitted in the offense under Section 363 IPC,” he said.
Accordingly, the judge ordered that the convict be sentenced to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 50,000 for an offense under Section 4 of the POCSO Act and in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo additional simple imprisonment for six years. Month.
Judge Nagar said the convict was also sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 5,000 for an offense under Section 366 of the IPC and in default of payment of the fine, he would have to undergo additional simple imprisonment of three months.
The judge ordered, “The period spent by the convict in jail during the trial will be adjusted in the original sentence awarded to him.Both the original sentences will run concurrently."
"Under the provision of Section 357 of the CrPC, 85 per cent of the fine imposed on the convict will be paid to meet the rehabilitation expenses of the victim," he said.
During the hearing of the case, the court also found discrepancy regarding the age of the victim, with her father claiming that she was 13 years old at the time of the incident, while her educational certificate and medico legal report stated her age to be around 16 years. . Old.
However, the court said that in any case, the victim was a minor at the time of the crime against her.
