Introduction:

In the case of Ramesh Ratan Jadhav v. State of Maharashtra & Ors., the Bombay High Court recently delivered a significant verdict concerning allegations of sexual assault on three minor girls by a primary school teacher. The appellant, Ramesh Ratan Jadhav, challenged his conviction under various sections of the IPC and the POCSO Act, asserting false implication and disputing the reliability of the victims’ testimonies.

Ramesh Ratan Jadhav, a primary school teacher, stood convicted for sexually assaulting three minor girls in the classroom. The prosecution’s case rested on the credible testimonies of the victims and corroborative evidence from witnesses, while the defence argued a motive of false implication due to animosity.

Arguments of Both Sides:

The defence contended that the FIR was lodged belatedly, suggesting ulterior motives related to school management disputes. They questioned the reliability of the minor victims’ testimonies, alleging coaching and inconsistency.

Conversely, the prosecution maintained that the delay in filing the FIR was justified and highlighted the consistent accounts of the victims, supported by witness statements. They emphasized the applicability of legal precedents affirming the reliability of child witnesses.

Court’s Judgment:

The Bombay High Court, upholding the trial court’s decision, found the evidence of the minor victims to be credible and consistent. It noted that Jadhav did not refute his presence at the school during the incidents nor adequately substantiate the claim of false implication. Citing previous judicial rulings, the court underscored the reliability of child witnesses and rejected the defence’s arguments against the prosecution’s case.