28 May,2026 08:43 AM IST | Mumbai | Vinod Kumar Menon
The Girgaon metropolitan magistrate court also imposed a fine of Rs 5000 on the 27-year-old accused. Representation Pic/iStock
The metropolitan magistrate court, Girgaon, recently convicted a 27-year-old labourer for sexually assaulting and injuring a woman waiting at a bus stop near Mahalaxmi in August last year, holding that the prosecution had proved the case beyond a reasonable doubt through the testimony of the survivor and corroborating medical evidence.
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate VB Gulve-Patil sentenced the accused, Surendrakumar Ramsamuj Saroj, to one year's rigorous imprisonment under Section 74 (assault or criminal force to a woman with intent to outrage her modesty) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for outraging the modesty of a woman, along with an additional three months rigorous imprisonment under Section 115(2) for voluntarily causing hurt. The court also imposed a fine of Rs 5000 on Saroj. According to the prosecution, the incident took place on August 21, 2025, around 8 pm at bus stop no. 07278 on Dr E Moses Road.
The informant alleged that the accused approached the woman, questioned her, and then pushed and bit her lips before fleeing. She raised an alarm, following which bystanders gathered, and her family was informed. The woman was taken to hospital for treatment and then to Tardeo police station, where an FIR was registered on August 22. The case was prosecuted by Assistant Public Prosecutors Maya Khairnar and Seema Lodh on behalf of the state of Maharashtra.
During the trial, the prosecution examined eight witnesses, including the complainant, her family members, doctors, and investigating officers. Dr Kiran Rajput, who examined the woman shortly after the incident, testified that she had suffered an injury measuring 0.5x0.5 cm on the lower left side of her lip. The court observed that the medical certificate and testimony of the doctor corroborated the woman's account of being bitten. "The medical certificate does support said fact... injury caused to the informant on account of said criminal assault," the judgment noted.
The defence advocate, Swapnil Sonawane, argued that the prosecution had failed to produce independent eyewitnesses despite the incident allegedly occurring at a crowded public bus stop.
>> The delay in filing the FIR
>> The adequacy of lighting at the spot
>> The reliability of the identification parade
>> The authenticity of CCTV footage collected during the investigation
>> The defence further contended that the complainant had allegedly been shown the accused by police personnel before the identification parade at Arthur Road Jail, thereby compromising the procedure
>> Arguments were also raised regarding alleged procedural lapses under provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), including non-compliance with audio-video recording requirements under Section 105
The magistrate held that the survivor had sufficient opportunity to identify the accused because of the close physical proximity during the assault. The court observed that the woman had consistently identified the accused during the trial and that there was no evidence of prior enmity or motive for false implication. "The principle of evidence is about the quality of the evidence and not quantity," the court stated, while emphasising that the sole testimony of a victim can form the basis of a conviction when supported by material evidence. The court also held that minor inconsistencies regarding CCTV footage, identification procedures, and procedural compliance did not undermine the core prosecution case.
The magistrate noted that the assault had caused serious psychological and emotional trauma to the complainant.
"Certainly that on the part of the accused was an invasion over her modesty (sic)," the judgment observed.
The court further remarked that, considering the nature of the offence and its impact on the woman, the accused was not entitled to the benefit of probation.
>> One-year rigorous imprisonment under BNS Section 74
>> Three-month rigorous imprisonment under BNS Section 115(2)
>> Both sentences must run concurrently
>> That the set-off date for the sentence is August 24, 2025
>> That the accused must surrender his bail bonds
