Penalty should be imposed on Judiciary for Delayed Justice says Bombay High Court

Must Read

“Anganwadi Centers to Be Reopened Outside the Containment Zones, Which Is to Be Decided by the State”: Supreme Court

This case concerns the reopening of the Anganwadi Centers after they had been closed due to the lockdown being...

“Credit Facilities Being Granted by the Primary Agricultural Credit Society to the Non-Members Is No Longer Illegal”: Supreme Court

This Case concerns the dispute relating to the grant of tax exemption under Section 80P of the Income Tax...

Back Wages of Labourers is a Question of Facts Depending Upon Various Factors: Gujarat High Court

The petition has been filed by workmen and employer against an award dated 23.04.2009 passed by the Labour Court,...

WhatsApp Messages Would Have No Evidentiary Value Until They Are Certified According to Section 65b of the Indian Evidence Act: Punjab & Haryana High...

Brief facts of the case Paramjit Kaur, the proprietor of Brioshine Pharma, a licensed chemist, booked two consignments. The first...

Delhi High Court Seeks Response From Centre, RBI in PIL to Regulate Online Lending Platforms

A notice had been issued by the Delhi HC in a PIL that sought regulation of online lending platforms...

“Consensual Affair” Cannot Be Defence Against the Charge of Kidnapping of the Minor, Sentence Reduced in View of Age Difference: Supreme Court

This Case concerns the appeal against the conviction under the charges of kidnapping and discussed whether the punishment was...

Follow us

The Bombay High Court increased the sentence of a man from South Bombay, who was accused of raping an adolescent domestic help worker. The trial court delivered a guilty verdict 14 years ago for the same, but the Bombay High Court increased the sentence and the amount of the fine imposed on the accused.

A bench of Justice Sadhana Jadhav and Justice N J Jamadar directed the accused to pay a fine of Rs. 11 lakhs instead of the original amount of Rs. 10,000, which was imposed by the sessions court on the accused in 2006. The Bench said that the amount of 11 lakh rupees is the amount for the victim.

The Court observed that,

“Once the court finds the evidence of the victim to be trustworthy, conviction follows. The passage of time will not be a justifiable reason to take a lenient view. Courts can’t be oblivious of the impact of such a heinous offence.”

This conviction was challenged by the accused, to which the state responded that

“The meagre sentence that was fewer than seven years of rigorous punishment/imprisonment, the minimum under the law existing at the time, and sought its enhancement.”

The High Court said that the accused’s bail bond stood cancelled and directed him earlier this month to surrender by January 4’ 2021. The accused had been out on bail. It was noted by the High Court that in case of handing out of lesser punishment than the minimum, the trial court will have to come forth and explain themselves and give special reasons. In this case, the High Court found that the sessions judge that was assigned for the case had no special reasons for the less than the bare minimum punishment.

The accused is now a 47 year old man. Advocate Girish Kulkarni is the counsel, who has been representing him in the court, and his arguments state that there has been no plausible reason stated by the girl for the delay in the FIR that had been filed by her. To this argument, the Court said that the victim was almost kept in confinement and was not allowed to communicate with anyone.

What more reason does the counsel need for the said ‘delay’ in the lodging of the FIR?

The High Court held that false implication was a lame defence taken by the accused without any effort to probablise it.

“Rape amounts to a serious blow to the supreme honour and dignity of a woman. It is a violation of Human Rights” remarked the Court.

“It is not just a physical injury, but a serious injury to the womanhood of the victim of Rape.”


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgement from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also contribute blog, articles, story tip, judgment and many more and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

“Anganwadi Centers to Be Reopened Outside the Containment Zones, Which Is to Be Decided by the State”: Supreme Court

This case concerns the reopening of the Anganwadi Centers after they had been closed due to the lockdown being imposed.  Brief facts of the case This...

“Credit Facilities Being Granted by the Primary Agricultural Credit Society to the Non-Members Is No Longer Illegal”: Supreme Court

This Case concerns the dispute relating to the grant of tax exemption under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961.  Brief facts of the...

Back Wages of Labourers is a Question of Facts Depending Upon Various Factors: Gujarat High Court

The petition has been filed by workmen and employer against an award dated 23.04.2009 passed by the Labour Court, Bhuj in the case of...

WhatsApp Messages Would Have No Evidentiary Value Until They Are Certified According to Section 65b of the Indian Evidence Act: Punjab & Haryana High...

Brief facts of the case Paramjit Kaur, the proprietor of Brioshine Pharma, a licensed chemist, booked two consignments. The first consignment, on 10.06.2020 and the,...

Delhi High Court Seeks Response From Centre, RBI in PIL to Regulate Online Lending Platforms

A notice had been issued by the Delhi HC in a PIL that sought regulation of online lending platforms (Dharanidhar Karimojji vs UOI). Brief Facts: The...

“Consensual Affair” Cannot Be Defence Against the Charge of Kidnapping of the Minor, Sentence Reduced in View of Age Difference: Supreme Court

This Case concerns the appeal against the conviction under the charges of kidnapping and discussed whether the punishment was to be enhanced or not.   Brief...

Delhi HC to Municipal Corp: Paucity of Funds Not an Excuse for Non-Payment of Salaries and Pensions

The Delhi High Court ruled that the paucity of funds cannot be an excuse and pulled up municipal corporations for not paying salaries and pensions to their employees as the right to receive payment is a fundamental right guaranteed in our constitution.

US Supreme Court Reinstates Restriction on Abortion Pills

The Supreme Court of the United States granted the Trump administration’s request to reinstate federal rules requiring women to make in-person visits to hospitals...

Supreme Court Upheld “Environmental Rule of Law” in NGT Decision to Demolish Illegal Hotel on Forest Land

This case concerns the dispute relating to the additional construction of hotel-cum-restaurant structure in the Bus Stand Complex along with a bus stand and...

UK Supreme Court Rules in Favour of Policyholders in the COVID-19 Business Interruption Case

The United Kingdom’s Supreme Court finally concluded the long-awaited COVID-19 business interruption case brought by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and the Hiscox Action...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -