The SC refuses to suppress Fir against the old judiciary accused of raping the little girl
The Supreme Court, who said shocking, refused to break off crimes against a former judicial official accused of sexual harassment of his little daughter. Shocking. He is a judicial officer and these are serious incest claims. This is shocking. And his daughter made claims. He must have been injured for life. How can this be a situation to suppress? “Justice is a bench of Mishra and Manmohan.
As a result, the counter rejected the appeal against a Supreme Court of Bombay, adopted on April 15, 2025, and enabled the court to be framed by the accusations. The bench did not accept the application that the judiciary was frame due to a long -standing marriage dispute with his alienated wife and that the case was an explosion and provided after the complainant was harassed by the complainant.
We don’t want to get into all this. Justice Manmohan said that suicide could be due to the actions of his son (judge). The former judge’s lawyer said that this man’s whole life was ruined starting from marriage problems. “His father committed suicide. The complaint was made much later and never mentioned during the previous legal procedures.
However, the counter said that the serious claims and charges under the protection of children from sexual crimes (POCSO) act against him. Following the abuse incidents between May 2014 and 2018, Mahashtra stems from a bir registered in Bhandara on 21 January 2019.
A accusation plate was opened, but in the case, official charges have not yet been framed, he said. The former judge was accused of 354 of the IPC in order to attack a woman to attack a woman in order to angry her humility, except for the 10th chapters of 7, 8, 9 (L), 9 (n) and PocSo Law, including aggravated and aggravated and adulthood.
The complaint claimed that the complaint was made with malicious intention and FIR was recorded for four years – after the alleged incidents, a continued custody dispute and the case of marriage coincided with. The claim said that the legal assumption under the POCSO law was incorrectly called for no basic real reality. The ball is expected to be tried in a private POCSO court with the court refuses to break the charges.
