1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. JUDGMENT Raghunath Singh Vs. State of Raj. S.B.CR. APPEAL NO. 25/1987. DATE OF JUDGMENT :- 19th August, 2008. P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH BHAGWATI Mr Ashindra Gautam for Mr S.K.Jindal, for the appellant. Mr B.K.Sharma, Public Prosecutor, for State. BY THE COURT Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment dated 19th December, 1986 whereby the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Jhalawar convicted the accused appellant Raghunath Singh in the offences under Sections 341, 354 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him as under: Section 341 IPC : Rigorous Imprisonment for 15 days. Section 354 IPC : Rigorous Imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for three months. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 2. The prosecution story succinctly runs as under: 2 That on 5th May, 1985 at about 9.00 AM, the prosecutrix PW/1, Kailash Bai was going from Kanwada to Nandia Kheri. On the way, near the well of Sheth, the accused Raghu Nath Singh came on bicycle and after crossing her, intercepted and wrongfully restrained her. It is alleged that the accused dragged her near a pit where he made her to lie on the ground and cuddled on her breasts. It is further alleged that the accused squeezed her breasts and made an attempt to commit coitus. Having heard her screams, Ganpat and Lila reached there who were taking their goats to graze in the field. On seeing them, the accused fled from there. On a written complaint Ex.P/1 of PW/1, Kailashi Bai, the FIR Ex.P/2 was registered and investigation commenced. During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer recorded the statements of witnesses acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., prepared a site plan Ex.P/4, and drew necessary memos and after usual investigation, sent the accused for trial before the Court. 3. The accused was indicted for the offences under Section 341 and 351 of IPC who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In order to further its version, the prosecution has examined as many as 8 3 witnesses. In his explanation furnished under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., the accused claimed innocence. On completion of trial, the accused was convicted and sentenced in the offences as indicated hereinabove. 4. Heard the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and with their assistance scanned the relevant material available on record. 5. The learned counsel for the appellant has not questioned the conviction of the accused and focused on extending the benefit of probation urging that the occurrence of this case took place as far back as on 5th May, 1985. The appellant has been in custody for 7 days during the trial of the case. Hence, after a long period of 23 years, if the accused is released on probation, the ends of justice would be meted out. The accused has also not been found involved in any other criminal case thereafter and thus, the accused may be extended the benefit of probation. 6. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor has fairly conceded that after a long journey of 23 years of criminal 4 proceedings, it does not appear to be justiciable to send the accused to jail for serving out the sentence. 7. Having perused the written report Ex.P/1 and F.I.R., Ex.P/2, it is found that the occurrence of this case took place as long as on 5th May, 1985. The appellant remained in custody for a period of 7 days during trial of the case. No previous conviction of the appellant is found to have been proved against him nor he is found to have been involved in any other criminal case thereafter. The antecedents of the appellant have no blemish. He has already undergone a tiring trauma of criminal proceedings for about 23 years which in itself is a sufficient punishment. Hence having ruminated all these factors, I deem it just and proper to release the accused appellant Raghunath Singh on probation under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders' Act, 1958. 8. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. His conviction in the offences under Section 341 and 354 IPC is confirmed. Instead of sentencing him to any punishment, it is directed that the accused appellant Raghunath Singh S/o Nahar Singh by caste 5 Rajput, R/o Kanwada, P.S., Jhalrapathan Distt. Jhalawar shall be released on probation on his entering into a personal bond of Rs. 20,000/- together with two sureties each of Rs. 10,000/- within a period of one month to the satisfaction of learned trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear and receive sentence when called upon during a period of two years of probation and in the meantime, shall keep the peace and be of good behaviour. (MAHESH BHAGWATI),J /gandhi