JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) These appeals are filed against the common final judgment
and order dated 23.07.2008 passed by the Division Bench of
the High Court of Bombay in Criminal Appeal Nos. 476, 603
and 681 of 2006 whereby the High Court allowed the appeals
and reversed the judgment dated 18.03.2006 passed by the
Additional Sessions Judge for Greater Bombay in Sessions
Case Nos. 87 of 2002, 886 of 2004 and 795 of 2005 convicting
all the accused under various Sections of the Indian Penal
Code (in short 'the IPC'), the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
(in short 'the Code') and the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 (in
short 'the JJ Act').
(2.) Brief Facts:
(a) In the year 1986, a petition was brought before the High
Court of Bombay complaining about the plight of children at
various children homes in Maharashtra. In the same petition,
the High Court appointed a Committee, namely, the
Maharashtra State Monitoring Committee on Juvenile Justice
(in short "the Committee") headed by Justice Hosbet Suresh, a
retired Judge of the High Court of Bombay. This Committee
received some complaints from the Child Rights Organizations
like Saathi Online, Childline and CRY about the
mismanagement of Anchorage Shelters, and on that basis, the
Committee sought permission of the High Court to visit
various Anchorage Shelters. After visiting various Anchorage
Shelters including the one at Colaba and Cuffe Parade, a
report was submitted before the High Court.
(b) On the basis of the said report, specifically expressing
unconfirmed report of sexual exploitation of children, on
17.10.2001, one Ms. Meher Pestonji telephoned Advocate Ms.
Maharukh Adenwala and informed her that some children
residing in Shelter Homes were sexually exploited by those
who were running these Homes. On receiving this
information, Ms. Maharukh Adenwala met those boys, who
were allegedly sexually assaulted, at the residence of Ms.
Meher Pestonji to ascertain the truth. After confirming the
said fact, Ms. Maharukh Adenwala thought it proper to inform
it to the Members of the Committee. After consulting the
Committee, Ms. Maharukh Adenwala moved a suo motu
Criminal Writ Petition No 585 of 1985 before the High Court.
On 19.10.2001, the High Court passed an order for the
protection of the children at Anchorage Shelter Homes. On
21.10.2001, one Shridhar Naik telephonically contacted Ms
Maharukh Adenwala and informed her that the order of the
High Court giving protection to the children was being
misinterpreted by the police and, therefore, certain
clarifications were sought from the High Court and by order
dated 22.10.2001, the High Court clarified the same.
(c) With regard to the sexual and physical abuse at the
Anchorage Shelters, on 24.10.2001, Childline India
Foundation filed a complaint with the Cuffe Parade Police
Station and while lodging the said complaint, Ms. Maharukh
Adenwala was also present there. In spite of the fact that a
complaint had been lodged, the police did not take cognizance
of the offence under the pretext that the matter was sub judice
and was pending before the High Court. Since the matter was
not being looked into by the police, Ms. Maharukh Adenwala
recorded statements of some of the victims and informed the
said fact to the Members of the Committee. On 28.10.2001,
Dr. (Mrs.) Kalindi Muzumdar and Dr. (Mrs.) Asha Bajpai met
those victims at the office of India Centre for Human Rights
and Law and endorsed that the statements previously
recorded by Ms. Maharukh Adenwala were correctly recorded.
After ascertaining the correctness of the statements by the
Members of the Committee, the said facts were placed before
the High Court and it was also submitted that the police
authorities at Cuffe Parade Police Station were not seriously
pursuing the complaint. The High Court, by order dated
07.11.2001, directed the police authorities of the State of
Maharashtra to take action on the basis of the complaint
lodged by the Childline India Foundation.
(d) Based on this specific direction, Sr. Inspector of Police,
Colaba Police Station was directed to investigate in detail the
complaint lodged by Childline and to take such action as is
required to be taken in law. On 12.11.2001, Colaba Police
Station recorded the statement of one Sonu Raju Thakur and
the statement of one Sunil Kadam (PW-1) was recorded by
Murud police station on 13.11.2001. On 15.11.2001, police
ultimately registered an offence at Colaba police station by
treating the statement of Sonu Raju Thakur as formal First
Information Report (in short 'the FIR') being C.R. No.
312/2001 and started investigation.
(e) Though the offence was mainly registered against three
accused barring William D'Souza (A1), the remaining two
accused, namely, Allan John Waters (A2) and Duncan
Alexander Grant (A3) had already left the country and
therefore, on 05.04.2002, an Interpol Red Corner Notice was
issued against A2 and A3. In pursuance of Red Corner Notice,
A2 was arrested in USA and sometimes thereafter A3 also
surrendered before the Court in India. The Metropolitan
Magistrate committed the case to the Court of Session and
after committal, it was initially assigned to the First Track
Court at Sewree. All the three accused pleaded not guilty and,
therefore, claimed to be tried.
(f) The Sessions Judge, by judgment dated 18.03.2006,
convicted William D'Souza (A1) for the offence punishable
under Section 377 read with Section 109 IPC, Sections 120B
and 323 IPC and under Section 23 of the JJ Act. Allan John
Waters (A2) was convicted under Section 377 IPC, Section
120B read with Section 377 IPC and Section 373 IPC. Duncan
Aleander Grant (A3) was convicted under Section 377 IPC,
Section 373 read with 109 IPC, Section 372 IPC and Section
23 of JJ Act.
(g) Aggrieved by the said order, A1 filed Criminal Appeal No.
681 of 2006, A2 and A3 filed Criminal Appeal No. 476 of 2006
before the High Court of Bombay. State Government also
preferred Criminal Appeal No. 603 of 2006 before the High
Court for enhancement of the sentence of the accused
persons. The High Court, vide its common judgment dated
23.07.2008, set aside the order of conviction passed by the
Sessions Judge and allowed the criminal appeals filed by A1,
A2 and A3 and acquitted all of them from the charges leveled
against them and dismissed the appeal filed by the State
Government.
(h) Aggrieved by the order of the High Court, Childline India
Foundation and Ms. Maharukh Adenwala filed Criminal
Appeal Nos. 1208-1210 of 2008 and State of Maharashtra has
filed Criminal Appeal No. 1205-1207 of 2008 before this Court
by way of special leave petitions.
(3.) Heard Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, learned senior counsel for
the appellants in Criminal Appeal Nos. 1208-1210 of 2008,
Mr. Sanjay V. Kharde, learned counsel for the appellants in
Criminal Appeal Nos. 1205-1207 of 2008, Mr. Shekhar
Naphade, learned senior counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 in
Crl. A. Nos. 1208 and 1210 of 2008 and Respondent Nos. 2 &
3 in Crl. A. No. 1206 of 2008 and Respondent No. 3 in Crl. A.
No. 1210 of 2008 and Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, learned
counsel for Respondent No. 1 in Crl.A. Nos. 1209, 1210, 1206
and sole Respondent in Crl. A.No. 1207 of 2008.;