FIR can’t be quashed on ground of delay: Bombay HC while hearing a Molestation Case

Team SoOLEGAL 5 Oct 2020 3:15pm

FIR can’t be quashed on ground of delay: Bombay HC while hearing a Molestation Case

Last week, a resident of Khar, Bombay appealed in the Bombay High Court to quash a case that has been filed against him for the charges of molestation of his own minor daughter. The High Court dismissed the plea and said that the FIR cannot be removed only based on the ground of delay. The division bench comprising of Justice S.S. Shinde and Justice M.S. Karnik rejected the aforesaid plea and said that the FIR cannot be cancelled because the crime was reported after excessive time (5 years later) of the incident taking place.

Relying on the mother of the victim, Khar police booked the accused man under Section 354(assault or use of criminal force against a woman with an intent to outrage her modesty), 354A (assault or use of criminal force to a woman with an intent to disrobe her) of the Indian Penal Code,1860, Section 8(sexual assault) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 and also under other relevant sections of the IPC. The victim’s mother also reported that her husband and the victim’s father (the accused) used to make inappropriate contact with the minor victim and also used to take bath naked in front of the victim when she was 5 to 6 years of age.

The accused had also appealed to the High Court to quash the FIR against him on the grounds that all the allegations made against him by his wife were false and made up stories because she was estranged from her husband and wanted to seek revenge on him. Saying this, the man submitted certain photographs and videos of him and his minor child to prove his innocence. Advocate Aditya Pratap Singh opposed the petition and said that after reading the whole FIR, the crime that was committed needed further investigations. He also submitted the recorded statement of the victim under Section 164 of Cr.P.C and mentioned that before testing the victim’s statement it would not be right for the court to cancel the FIR filed against the accused. Advocate Aditya Pratap’s submissions were accepted by the High Court and the bench said that the crime and the allegations violated the Sections of IPC and POCSO Act and that, the allegations made would be further examined and investigated.

Tagged: Molestation Case   Bombay HC   Justice S.S. Shinde   Justice M.S. Karnik   FIR   Khar police   criminal force   Indian Penal Code   POCSO Act   Advocate Aditya Pratap Singh  
Did you find this write up useful? YES 0 NO 0

C2RMTo Know More

Something Awesome Is In The Work









Sign-up and we will notify you of our launch.
We’ll also give some discount for your effort :)

* We won’t use your email for spam, just to notify you of our launch.

SAARTHTo Know More

Launching Soon : SAARTH, your complete client, case, practise & document management SAAS application with direct client chat feature.

If you want to know more give us a Call at :+91 98109 29455 or Mail