A 57-year-old taxi driver from Thane has been convicted for procuring a minor girl but walked free after being acquitted of more severe charges of rape and aggravated sexual assault. The Additional Sessions Court delivered its verdict in a case that had kept the accused in judicial custody for nearly four years.
Court's Verdict and Sentencing
Additional Sessions Judge DS Deshmukh sentenced the man to the period he had already undergone in jail, which was close to four years. The court also imposed a fine of Rs 5,000. The judge ruled that while the prosecution successfully proved the accused lured and took away the 11-year-old child with wrongful intent under Section 366-A of the Indian Penal Code, it failed to provide conclusive evidence for the charges of penetrative sexual assault.
Details of the 2022 Incident
According to prosecutor Rekha Hiwrale, the incident occurred on January 3, 2022, in Mumbra. The child was playing outside her residential building with friends when the accused approached them. The prosecution stated that the man enticed the children with offers of chocolates and ice cream. He then took them for a ride in his taxi.
After dropping the other children near a mosque, he continued alone with the girl to an isolated area in Khardi village. Judge Deshmukh found the evidence established beyond doubt that the accused deliberately separated the child from her friends and took her to a remote location with the intent to seduce her for illicit purposes.
Gaps in Evidence Lead to Acquittal on Serious Charges
The court's decision to acquit the man of rape charges stemmed from critical gaps and contradictions in the evidence presented. A medical examination conducted just one day after the alleged incident showed no signs of fresh injuries. The doctor found only old, healed hymenal tears that were sustained more than 48 hours before the examination, which directly contradicted the prosecution's timeline of events.
Furthermore, the judge noted that the child did not immediately report any sexual assault. She did not tell her mother at the police station or her grandmother on the evening of the incident. The disclosure came only the next day to a family friend. During cross-examination, the child admitted that her deposition in court was based on what her mother and advocate had told her, raising serious concerns about potential coaching.
Forensic analysis also yielded no corroborative evidence. Tests on seized clothes, nail clippings, and swabs revealed no semen or biological material linking the accused to a penetrative assault. While the Public Prosecutor argued for conviction citing Supreme Court precedents on the reliability of child witnesses, the defence successfully highlighted the multiple contradictions and missing evidence in the case.
