IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Criminal Appeal No. 338 of 1999 Date of Decision : July 8, 2010 State of Himachal Pradesh Appellant Versus Nand Lal Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the appellant : Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. Advocate General. For the respondent : Mr. G. D. Verma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Romesh Verma, Advocate, for the respondent. Deepak Gupta, J. (Oral) The accused was convicted for having committed an attempt to rape punishable under Section 376 read with Section 511 of the Indian Penal code. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 3000/-. In default of payment of fine he was to undergo further imprisonment for a period of six months. 2. The offence in question is alleged to have been committed in the year 1991. According to the police the accused absconded thereafter and surrendered after seven years. He was convicted after trial on 17.5.1999. An appeal was filed by the accused challenging the order of his conviction which was numbered as Whether reports of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 Criminal Appeal No. 226 of 1999 which came up for final hearing before this Court on 11.10.1999. The learned Single Judge after hearing the appeal found no merit in the same and dismissed the appeal. He also upheld the sentence awarded against the accused. 3. It appears that on 28.7.1999 the State also preferred the present appeal for enhancement of sentence. This appeal was admitted on 21.9.1999. When the matter came up for hearing on October 11, 1999 before the learned Single Judge he was not informed that any appeal had been filed by the State. In case he had been so informed both these appeals would have been heard together. The accused may not have been aware of the filing of the appeal since he was served on 15.10.1999 in the present appeal. 4. Now almost two decades have passed since the offence took place. The accused was not found guilty of committing rape but of having made an attempt to rape. He was eighteen years of age when the offence was committed. He has already undergone the sentence imposed upon him. At this belated stage it is not expedient or in the interest of justice to enhance the sentence imposed upon the accused. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case the appeal is dismissed. (Deepak Gupta), Judge. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. July 8, 2010 (PK)