This story is from December 1, 2014

Despite minor girl's consent, teen held for rape but gets lighter sentence

Court said that in view of the fact that she was below 16 years of age at the time, her consent would be quite immaterial.
Despite minor girl's consent, teen held for rape but gets lighter sentence
MUMBAI: Four years after a 19-year-old Pune youth, Ankush Chavan, was arrested for raping a minor, the Bombay high court said though it appeared that the victim girl was a consenting party, he cannot be spared of a jail term.
"Though, it appears to me that the victim was, in all probability, a consenting party, in view of the fact that she was below 16 years of age at the time, her consent would be quite immaterial in the context of allegations of having committed rape," said Justice Abhay Thipsay.

However, the HC agreed to the defence lawyer's plea to consider the case leniently, despite the fact that the Union government introduced changes in rape laws in 2013 following the Nirbhaya incident. The judge said that since the present case occurred in 2010, before changes in the law, it could reduce the 10 years term awarded by the sessions court.
"The (his) case can, in the circumstances, be treated sympathetically for the purposes of considering the reduction of the sentence imposed upon him," the judge said. The HC cited the fact that then youth himself was a young man of 19 at the time of the incident. "He had no past criminal record to his discredit. His parents are present in the court and I find that his family ties are not severed," the judge said while reducing the prison term to five years.
The incident dates back to 2010, when the girl said she was forcibly made to sit on a bike by Chavan, and another co-accused, and taken to a remote corner where they raped her. The trial court convicted Chavan while the co-accused was acquitted.
The HC noted that in her statement before the trial court, she admitted that the bike passed through a crowded place where they stopped to eat and her cousins had seen her. "There is certainly a case for doubting whether the victim was taken forcibly to a remote place by the appellant or the other accused, or whether she herself voluntarily and willingly went with him," the judge said.
author
About the Author
Shibu Thomas

Shibu Thomas is a special correspondent at The Times of India in Mumbai. He writes on legal issues in the Bombay high Court and other courts in the city. He has written on PILs filed by citizens, human rights violations and prisoners caught in the legal system. He has travelled across two continents and plans to cover the remaining five.

End of Article
FOLLOW US ON SOCIAL MEDIA