Mumbai: The Dindoshi Sessions Court has acquitted a 55-year-old Uttar Pradesh (UP) resident who was arrested for an offence he had allegedly committed in 1995—kidnapping a minor girl, taking her to his hometown in UP, and later sexually assaulting her.
The court held that at the time of the incident, the victim was around 15 years old, an age at which she could understand her actions. However, the court noted that since she did not support the prosecution’s case and denied the allegations levelled against the accused, the charges could not be proved.
Roshanlal Sundarlalsingh Thakur, who was 25 at the time of the alleged offence, was acquitted of all charges after the NGO Dard Se Humdard Tak argued on his behalf. The NGO, run by Advocate Prakash Salsingekar, is known for providing legal assistance to undertrial prisoners who are unable to fight their cases due to lack of legal representation.
According to case details, the alleged incident occurred on April 30, 1995. Thakur was accused of kidnapping a 15- to 16-year-old girl from her parents’ guardianship, performing a mock marriage with her, and repeatedly sexually assaulting her.
A First Information Report (FIR) was initially registered on June 9, 1995, at the Dahisar Police Station against an unknown person, based on a complaint filed by the victim’s father.
Thakur was arrested on July 10, 1995, and later released on bail on October 30, 1995. He was re-arrested on a Non-Bailable Warrant (NBW) on January 19, 2024, and had since been lodged at Thane Central Prison.
During the trial, the prosecution examined only one witness—the victim herself. Now 42 years old, she testified that she knew the accused as a neighbour but claimed she did not remember the incident or why she had gone to his home in Uttar Pradesh.
She denied living with him as his wife, denied having any physical relationship with him, and stated that she did not wish to proceed with the case. She also denied having made any previous statement to the police.
The prosecution’s attempts to examine her parents and the medical officer were denied, as the parents were considered hearsay witnesses, the case was over two decades old, and the victim had turned hostile. The Investigating Officer could also not be examined, as summons issued to him were returned unserved and his whereabouts remain unknown.
The defence argued that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, emphasizing that the sole witness had denied all allegations and had not identified the accused.
In its judgment, the court noted that the entire case rested on the testimony of the victim, who had turned hostile and did not support the prosecution’s version of events.
With no corroborative evidence presented, the court concluded that the prosecution had failed to establish the charges of kidnapping, forced marriage, and repeated sexual assault beyond reasonable doubt.
