A Pune man spent seven years in jail after facing serious POCSO allegations by relatives. All key witnesses later denied any abuse, and the court found zero medical or documentary proof, leading to full acquittal.
MAHARASHTRA:A Pune special POCSO court has acquitted a 48-year-old man, Maheshwar Bindmadhav Thakur, after he spent seven years in jail on the false charge of raping his minor daughter. The court said the prosecution failed completely to prove the case, and every key witness – including the girl, the mother, and the grandmother’s sister, denied that any sexual assault ever happened.
The case started in August 2018 after the girl’s maternal grandmother’s sister went to Kondhwa Police Station and claimed that the girl had told her about repeated sexual assault by her father. Based on this statement, police registered FIR No. 434/2018 under several IPC 376 provisions and multiple sections of the POCSO Act. He was arrested on 2 August 2018 and remained in jail till the judgment on 25 November 2025.
During the trial, the entire story collapsed.
The court noted that three main witnesses turned hostile — the girl, her mother, and the relative who initially took her to the police. All three clearly told the court that no such assault or threat ever happened.
The minor girl told the court:
“She had not told her grandmother that any assault had occurred and that her father never did anything to her.”
The mother also stated:
“The victim’s mother nor her grandmother’s sister said any such incident occurred.”
She added:
“There was no disclosure from the girl that the accused committed repeated sexual assault or rape on her.”
The judge recorded that even the woman who filed the FIR admitted that the girl had “said nothing to her” about any assault when questioned during evidence.
The court further found that there was no medical, forensic, or independent documentary evidence supporting the allegations. The age-verification report simply showed that the girl was a minor, but the court held that age alone cannot prove assault without supporting evidence.
The judgment clearly observed that:
“There was no disclosure of such sexual assault or threat.
Neither the victim’s mother nor her grandmother’s sister said any such incident occurred.
There was no disclosure from the girl that the accused committed repeated sexual assault or rape on her.”
The judge concluded that the prosecution could not prove guilt “beyond reasonable doubt” and that all allegations remained unsubstantiated.
Finally, the court acquitted the man of all charges under IPC 376(2)(F), 376(2)(I), 376(2)(J), 376(2)(N), 376(3), 323, 506(1) and POCSO Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10.
He was ordered to be released immediately unless required in any other case.
Explanatory Table Of Sections Used In This Case
| Section | Act | Meaning in Simple English | Punishment Range | What Court Said |
| 376(2)(F) | IPC | Rape of a minor daughter/close relative | 10 years to life | Not proved due to zero evidence |
| 376(2)(I) | IPC | Rape of child under 16 years | 10 years to life | Not proved |
| 376(2)(J) | IPC | Rape where victim cannot give consent | 10 years to life | Not proved |
| 376(2)(N) | IPC | Repeated rape | 10 years to life | Not proved |
| 376(3) | IPC | Rape of child under 16 years | Minimum 20 years to life | Not proved |
| 323 | IPC | Causing hurt by beating | Up to 1 year jail | Not proved |
| 506(1) | IPC | Criminal intimidation (threats) | Up to 2 years jail | Not proved |
| POCSO Sec 3(b) | POCSO | Sexual assault using touch of private parts | 3–5 yrs | Not proved |
| POCSO Sec 4(2) | POCSO | Punishment for penetrative sexual assault | 10 yrs to life | Not proved |
| POCSO Sec 5(l) | POCSO | Aggravated assault (repeated / severe) | 10 yrs to life | Not proved |
| POCSO Sec 6 | POCSO | Punishment for aggravated penetrative assault | 20 yrs to life / death | Not proved |
| POCSO Sec 5(m) | POCSO | Assault on child below 12 years | 20 yrs to life | Not proved |
| POCSO Sec 5(n) | POCSO | Assault by father/relative | 20 yrs to life | Not proved |
| POCSO Sec 9(l) | POCSO | Aggravated sexual assault (repeated) | 5–7 yrs | Not proved |
| POCSO Sec 10 | POCSO | Punishment for aggravated sexual assault | Up to 7 yrs | Not proved |
| POCSO Sec 9(m) | POCSO | Assault on child under 12 years (non-penetrative) | Up to 7 yrs | Not proved |
| POCSO Sec 9(n) | POCSO | Non-penetrative assault by father | Up to 7 yrs | Not proved |
| CrPC 235(1) | CrPC | Court gives final judgment of acquittal/conviction | — | Used for acquittal |
| CrPC 437A | CrPC | Bail bond after acquittal | — | Court ordered ₹50,000 bond |
Case Title: State of Maharashtra vs. Maheshwar Bindmadhav Thakur (Special POCSO Case No. 410/2018, CNR No. MHPU01-012983-2018)
Counsels
| Side | Name |
| Prosecution / State | Special Public Prosecutor: Smt. A.V. Bhagat |
| Defence (Accused) | Adv. S.P. Salunke |
Bench / Judge
Smt. Kavita D. Shirbhate
Special Judge (POCSO) & Additional Sessions Judge, Pune
Judgment Pronounced on: 25 November 2025
Uploaded on: 26 November 2025
Important Case Details
| Detail | Information |
| FIR Number | 434/2018 |
| Police Station | Kondhwa Police Station, Pune |
| Date of Incident (alleged period) | March 2017 – July 2018 |
| Date of FIR | 02 August 2018 |
| Date of Chargesheet | 25 September 2018 |
| Arrest Date | 02 August 2018 |
| Accused’s Age | 48 years |
| Accused’s Occupation | Watchman |
| Place of Incident | Rented room, Laxmi Nagar, Kondhwa Budruk, Pune |
| Victim’s Age (as per age report) | Between 15 and 17 years during medical exam |
| Trial Start (Evidence) | 06 February 2025 |
| Arguments Completed | 21 November 2025 |
| Acquittal Ordered | 25 November 2025 |
| Years in Jail | 7+ years as undertrial |
| Reason for Acquittal | All 3 witnesses turned hostile + no medical evidence + no corroboration |
| Final Court Direction | Accused to be released immediately unless wanted in any other case |
| Post-acquittal Requirement | Bail bond of ₹50,000 under Section 437A CrPC |
Key Takeaways
- A man lost seven years of his life because a case was built on statements that collapsed in court, proving how easily a man can be jailed without evidence.
- All three prime witnesses, including the child and the mother, denied any assault, showing how fragile and unverified allegations can destroy families.
- No medical, forensic, or documentary proof existed, yet the man remained behind bars for years, exposing systemic failure.
- The court had to acquit only because the prosecution could not prove anything, not because the system protected him from false charges. · This case highlights the urgent need for accountability, penalties for false or unproven accusations, and gender-neutral investigation standards to prevent such injustice to men.
This Could Change Your Case-Get FREE Legal Advice-Click Here!
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the Indian courts and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of “ShoneeKapoor.com” or its affiliates. This article is intended for informational and educational purposes only. The content provided is not legal advice, and viewers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Viewer discretion is advised.