Case Note & Summary
The case arose from a suo motu public interest litigation initiated by the Bombay High Court after a newspaper report exposed the poor conditions in children’s homes in Maharashtra. The court appointed the Maharashtra State Co-ordination Committee for Child Protection, which inspected Kalyani Mahila Balkalyan Seva Sanstha, a home for mentally challenged girls at Khanda Colony, New Panvel. The inspection revealed gross mismanagement and suspected physical and sexual harassment of the nineteen inmates. The Child Welfare Committee, Raigad, further visited the home on 28 February 2011 and confirmed the suspicion of sexual abuse. The girls were medically examined on 2 March 2011, and the reports indicated that some were habituated to sexual intercourse. Following the medical confirmation, the girls were shifted to another institution, and the President of the Child Welfare Committee lodged an FIR on 4 March 2011 for offences under Sections 376, 109, and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. Investigation led to the arrest of several accused, including the president, directors, and staff of the sanstha. Medical examinations of the victims, conducted at JJ Hospital, revealed severe physical and sexual abuse. The charge sheet was filed, and the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Greater Bombay. Initially charged under various sections of the IPC and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, an additional charge under Section 302 IPC for the murder of an inmate named Seeta was framed later. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed false implication. The trial court, after examining twenty-two prosecution witnesses and defence evidence, convicted several accused under multiple sections of the IPC and the JJ Act. Accused No.1 Ramchandra Karanjule was sentenced to death for murder, along with life imprisonment and other terms for sexual offences. Other accused received varying sentences for offences including rape, unnatural offences, abetment, and assault. Some accused were acquitted. Aggrieved by the judgment dated 21 March 2013, the convicted accused filed appeals, while the State filed a confirmation case for the death sentence and an appeal against the acquittals. The High Court heard the matters together and reserved judgment on 2 March 2016, delivering the decision on 11 March 2016.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court judgment is sustainable in law and fact?
Case Details
2016 LawText (BOM) (03) 88
Confirmation Case No. 03 of 2013 with Criminal Appeal Nos. 416 of 2013, 426 of 2013, 452 of 2013, 508 of 2013, 528 of 2013, 600 of 2013, 896 of 2014 and Criminal Application No. 191 of 2014
Ranjit More, Anuja Prabhudessai
Ms. Rohini Salian, Smt. V.R. Bhosale, Mr. Mahesh Vaswani, Mr. Niranjan Mundargi, Ms. Dharini Nagda, Ms. Anushree Kulkarni, Ms. Lata Shanbhag, Ms. Shama Mulla, Mr. Vikram Ssutaria, Mr. Omkar Mulekar, Mr. Shishir Hire, Mr. Jagdish Shetty, Miss. Anjali Patil, Miss. Shweta Sangtani, Mr. Prashant Aher
The State of Maharashtra (Confirmation Case No. 03 of 2013 & Appeal No. 896 of 2014); Ramchandra Sambhaji Karanjule (Appeal No. 426 of 2013); Prakash Vithal Khadke (Appeal No. 416 of 2013); Khandu Nanaji Kasbe @ Deepak Mayekar (Appeal No. 452 of 2013); Sonali Mohan Badade (Appeal No. 508 of 2013); Nanabhau Laxman Karanjule (Appeal No. 528 of 2013); Parvati Shamsunder Mavale (Appeal No. 600 of 2013)
Ramchandra Sambhaji Karanjule & Ors. (for State appeals); The State of Maharashtra (for convicts' appeals)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeals against conviction and sentence for sexual abuse of mentally challenged girls in a children’s home, and confirmation of death sentence.
Remedy Sought
The accused seek acquittal or reduction of sentence; the State seeks confirmation of death sentence and appeals against acquittals of some accused.
Filing Reason
The trial court convicted the accused, and they have appealed; the State has filed confirmation case for death sentence and appeal against acquittals.
Previous Decisions
The Addl. Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay in Sessions Case No. 688 of 2011 convicted and sentenced several accused and acquitted others.
Issues
Whether the trial court correctly convicted the accused under various IPC and JJ Act sections?
Whether the death sentence imposed on accused no.1 is justified?
Whether the acquittals of certain accused were justified?
Judgment Excerpts
In the month of October 2010, Mumbai Mirror, a local daily carried a news report exposing pitiable condition of the children in children homes in the State.
The said Kalyani Sanstha was registered under the Public Trust Act, as well as with the Women and Child Department.
The medical reports revealed that the girls were subjected to severe physical and sexual abuse.
Procedural History
PIL No.182 of 2010 filed in Bombay High Court; committee appointed to inspect children homes; inspection of Kalyani Sanstha; report submitted; CWC visit on 28 Feb 2011; medical examination on 2 Mar 2011; FIR lodged on 4 Mar 2011; investigation; charge sheet filed; trial held; conviction and sentence on 21.3.2013; appeals and confirmation case filed; High Court heard arguments and reserved judgment on 2.3.2016, delivered on 11.3.2016.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 302, 376(2)(c), 376(2)(g), 377, 324, 354, 307, 467, 468, 471, 109, 114, 34
- Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000: 23, 25
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 366, 161, 164, 313, 233(2)
