New Delhi: A Delhi court recently sentenced a man to imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life for sexually assaulting a seven-year-old girl, saying that being a first-time offender was not a mitigating factor under the POCSO Act.
Ambika Prasad Upadhay was convicted in Oct this year under section 376-AB (punishment for raping a woman under the age of 12), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), and 354 (assault or use of criminal force against a woman with the intent to outrage her modesty) of the IPC, and section 6 (aggravated penetrative sexual assault) and 10 (aggravated sexual assault) of the POCSO Act.
The court of additional sessions judge Babita Puniya said that the 30-year-old was the neighbour of the survivor, living in the same building, and added that he did not deserve any leniency.
“It has emerged from the evidence on record that the convict was the neighbour of the victim. She and her mother must have trusted him as a neighbour. Yet, he lured and sexually assaulted her. Thus, his behaviour with her was not only a disgusting abuse of physical power but also a violation of trust as a neighbour. He acted in a manner unacceptable in our society,” the court said.
The court also directed compensation of Rs 12.5 lakh to the victim girl.
According to the prosecution, Upadhay committed sexual assault on the girl in Feb this year. He called the girl into his room on the pretext of giving her snacks. The case was registered at Nihal Vihar police station.
Special public prosecutor Shrawan Kumar Bishnoi, praying for maximum sentence, submitted before the court that the punishment should send a clear message to potential offenders that such crimes will not be tolerated in society.
The SPP further submitted that the convict took advantage of the victim’s vulnerability, knowing that he was trusted.
“Society demands that offenders be punished for their crimes. However, a court must strike a balance and must not overemphasise one factor,” the court said.
The court took note of the report of the jail superintendent who said Upadhay’s conduct was “satisfactory”. But the curt said his “satisfactory conduct” in prison cannot be cited as a mitigating factor against the sentence.
“This court cannot lose sight of the fact that during the trial, he tried to find out ways, by changing his appearance, to get himself off the hook,” the court said.
The court rejected the contention of the legal aid counsel (LAC) for the convict, who argued that since it was a case of digital penetration and not of penile-vaginal penetration, a lenient view may be taken while imposing the sentence. The court said: “According to him, this was a mitigating factor in favour of the convict. I do not agree. Fingering is one of the vilest and most revolting forms of rape. What was once unimaginable has now become a common occurrence.”
