The Bombay High Court bench comprising of Justices Suman Shyam and Shyam C. Chandak has partly allowed the appeal of the accused who was convicted by the Nashik Sessions Court in 2015 for offences under Sections 376(2)(f), 377, and 363 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The appellant (accused) had been sentenced to life imprisonment for rape and unnatural offences, and three years for kidnapping.
The Division Bench observed that while the prosecution proved Gaikwad had taken his three-year-old niece from her mother’s custody on the pretext of buying clothes, there was no direct or forensic evidence linking him to the sexual assault. The Court noted the failure to examine the victim or the investigating officer who recorded her statement, holding this omission a denial of fair trial. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the Bench ruled that the “last seen together” theory is a weak piece of evidence and cannot solely sustain a conviction for rape and sodomy.
Consequently, the Court acquitted the appellant of charges under Sections 376(2)(f) and 377 IPC while upholding his conviction under Section 363 IPC (kidnapping). Since he had already spent over 10 years in custody, the maximum sentence for kidnapping, the Court directed that he be released unless required in any other case
Cases relied on
1. Ravinder v. State of Maharashtra, (1998) 8 SCC 177
2. Ganesh Bhavan Patel v. State of Maharashtra, (1978) 4 SCC 371
3. Javed Abdul Razak Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra, (2023) 9 SCC 356
4. Anjan Kumar Sharma v. State of Assam, (2017) 14 SCC 359
5. Navaneethakrishnan v. State, (2018) 16 SCC 161
6. Satye Singh v. State of Uttarakhand, (2022) 5 SCC 438
Appearances:
Mr. Sandeep Karnik, Legal-aid appointed Advocate, for the Appellant.
Ms. Deepa Punjabi, Legal-aid appointed Advocate, for Respondent No.2.
Ms. G. P. Mulekar, APP, for Respondent No.1/State.
