Mr India, first runner-up Siddesh Juvekar to face fresh trial in rape case & cheating

0
Image source: FB

The Bombay high Court at Goa has suppressed the order passed by the trial court discharging Siddesh Dashrath Juvekar, the first runner-up of the Mr India Manhunt Contest 2015 from the severe case of rape and cheating a Navelim based woman. He will now face the trial in context to this case. Let’s take a look at the preview of this case.

[su_expand more_text=”READ MORE” less_text=” ” height=”0″ hide_less=”yes” link_style=”button” link_align=”center”] On 13th, November 2013  Siddesh Juvekar, a resident of Betul, Goa  and a well-known face from the modelling industry was charge sheeted under Sections 376 and 420 of Indian Penal Code for raping and cheating a woman in an FIR registered by Colva police. He was suspected of having repeated sexual intercourse with the victim girl under the false promise of marrying her. He was also charged with cheating a victim girl and taking Rs. 5lakhs from her on the false ground of starting a business.

When the case was in the Margao court Siddesh was, however, discharged by the south Goa Additional Sessions Judge on 4th July 2014, without going through the trial. This case has now taken a turn as the final decision was given by the Additional Sessions Judge, provoked the victim to challenge it, moving to the high court.

Justice S.B. Shukre of the Bombay High Court at Goa has allowed the victim girls petition setting aside the South Goa Additional District Judge’s order. They had directed the accused to appear before the Margao sessions court on March 14th for trial. As regulated by the High Court Siddesh Juvekar along with his lawyer appeared before Judge Sherin Paul and was directed to furnish a surety of Rs 25,000. Advocate Aires Rodrigues, who is representing the victim girl, moved an application to assist the prosecution.

During the hearing of the case, Victim’s counsel Advocate Aires Rodrigues submitted that the accused was discharged by the court ignoring the well-settled principles of law. He also argued that at the time of considering discharge of an alleged accused under Section 227 CrPC, it was not permissible for the Sessions Court to appreciate the evidence in a manner as to record findings on merits of the case.

On these charges, juvekar’s lawyer submitted that space for the revisional jurisdiction of the High Court is limited and it is restricted only to examine the correctness and cannot be considered to be disclosing any offence. He also stated that on any of these restrictions no fault could be found with the questioned order. Advocate stated saying “…if the trial of the accused is held for the offences alleged against him, it would be nothing but an exercise in futility.” He also stated that complainant had involved herself in this acts which amounted to consensual sex.

On this urgings, Justice S B Shukre detected that the south Goa Additional Sessions Judge had committed illegality by discharging Juvekar and by neglecting the well-settled principles of law and further he also observed that such an order cannot stand the scrutiny of law.

The order says that “Such an order cannot stand the scrutiny of law. The revision application is allowed. The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The trial shall proceed in accordance with law.”

It added, “Considering the nature of controversy which appears to be going on since the year 2009, it would be in the interest of justice that it is put to an end at the earliest. Therefore, it is directed that the trial shall be decided on merits within six months from the appearance of the parties.”

The South Goa Additional Sessions Judge Sherin Paul has fixed for March 18 the framing of charges against the accused. Siddesh Juvekar is said to be a close relative of BJP leader Pradeep Shet who owns the Antique Mardol Hotel at Verna. The accused has been pursuing modelling as a career and was the first runner-up at the ‘Mr India Man Hunt’ contest held last year at New Delhi by Sky Walk Entertainment. The charges on the accused will be known only after the hearing on March 18.

Source: Various Sources [/su_expand]

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Comment moderation is enabled. Your comment may take some time to appear.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.