Chandigarh: 20-year jail for youth for repeatedly raping minor

Nearly three years after a youth repeatedly raped a 16-year-old girl after moving into a live-in relationship with her in February 2021, a special fast-track POCSO court has sentenced him to 20-year rigorous imprisonment.

The court held the accused, Ritik Sharma, 22, a resident of Mauli Jagran, guilty under Section 6 (aggravated penetrative sexual assault) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, and Sections 376 (3) (committing rape on a woman under 16 years of age) and 376 (2)(n) (committing rape repeatedly on the same woman) of the Indian Penal Code. He was also fined ₹20,000.

The case into the matter was registered at the Mauli Jagran police station in February 2021 on the basis of a zero FIR at the Sector 20 police station in Panchkula.

As per police, the girl, who was then 16 years old, had left home after a quarrel with her parents. She then moved to Manimanjra and met her sister’s friend. The next day, she took a room on rent.

It was stated that the girl met Sharma at a park in Manimajra, following which he took her to his house in Mauli Jagran and introduced her to his parents. However, his parents turned the girl away, as she did not have her parents’ approval.

The next day, the youth and the girl moved out and started living together in a rented accommodation.

Meanwhile, the girl’s parents lodged a missing person’s report. Following investigation, she was rescued and handed over to her family. The accused was booked under Sections 376 (rape) of IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act at the Mauli Jagran police station.

During court proceedings, the girl did not give a statement against the accused, claiming that she was not forced.

In court, the convict stated that he was innocent and had no criminal record, adding that he had been falsely implicated in the present case. Pleading for a lenient view, he submitted that he was very poor and had elderly parents to look after.

Whereas, the special public prosecutor for state argued that the convict should be dealt sternly by the court, adding that not awarding appropriate punishment commensurating with degree of crime may undermine public confidence in the efficacy of law.

On this, the court observed, “Considering the plea of the convict, age of victim and necessity of harmonious construction between deterrence against crime viz-a-viz approach of punishment, the hand of justice need not be tempered with mercy in such cases.”

No compensation will be awarded to the girl as she did not support the prosecution’s case.