[Speedy Trial] Sexual assault accused charged, convicted and sentenced in two days by Pune court

A Pune Court last month convicted a man accused of outraging modesty of woman after a short trial lasting only 2 days from the date of registration of the case [State of Maharashtra vs Sameer @ Nana Shrirang Jadhav]..The case was registered against the convict, Sameer Jadhav, on January 27, 2022 and the conviction verdict was pronounced by the Judicial Magistrate SJ Dolare on January 29, in 2022.The court noted that the accused had tried to threaten the complainant and a witness in the case in a manner so grievous that the complainant could not sleep the whole night. From this, the Magistrate concluded that defence grounds were not sufficient to grant leniency. "...correct message should be sent to the society that such offences will not be weighed lightly and the wrongdoer will be punished severely," the judge emphasized in his verdict.In the 20-page judgment recording reasons for conviction, the Court remarked that the "act (of outraging modesty of women) is increasing day by day in the society and shall be curbed at its threshold, otherwise it will result in nipping young life in bud”..The short timeline of the case is as follows:January 24, 2022: The criminal act took place against the informant;January 25, 2022: The informant registered a complaint with the Hinjewadi police station and a first information report (FIR) was registered;January 26, 2022: Sameer Jadhav was arrested;January 27, 2022: Charges were framed under Sections 354 (outraging modesty of woman), 452 (house-trespass), and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code and after Jadhav pleaded not guilty, trial commenced..The prosecution examined five witnesses.Defence counsel Advocate BR Retwade asked the Court to show mercy on the ground that the accused is required to maintain a hotel business and he had to care for his elderly mother. He also highlighted that there was delay in lodging FIR. He further pointed out that there was a possibility that the eye-witness in the case, the child of the informant, on whom the prosecution was relying upon, could have been tutored..The Court noted that the child's testimony remained unchallenged and it transpired confidence. It was also noted that the "unchallenged sole testimony of the informant is sufficient to hold the accused guilty". The Court also concluded from the evidence that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had taken undue advantage of the woman and outraged her modesty..In view of these observations, the Court pronounced the accused guilty under the offences charged and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment of 6 months and find of ₹3000..[Read Judgment]