^vyw%';"<S^th!•{,''';'-'?"'i""'^W^'!-T11 IR IMi. li? li1"^1Bt; ^M w^ \f~v!i .!lllfl; I'*..1% .'^. !» ww. §: s r w.. w ,<r ^ •fl 0' ,tn w .l~t;®:s .:.:(n',0,a^ : ,.'^:^p<,g' , [<'.: •w 'l* :pl....; •p).i-*&P1 t-J.Q ?',• •(D^p'l-1 &i >a ft^ -p'n';.:..pi:, ls:il,w'> ^M°. • ^; E]-K!: "i)v t3 B ffi K .j3.:p),lB( G. 'RWn-S, .(B- p.m,8'l? ^•:"^ 'ln' (U •h< ;»Q .& ':.L.i. w x t-J •I1 ^^ii^3^^HC ^SsySif i;rij,.;s^sB-n,S^^ 1^3?:5r ^^^ga^^S-,iW^.-.-^ltvww'^''-'~-••••••: . ^ ^ . ><-—^". '. c!^WVVV:y^:. ^^^i:^-^!^^^ K^ii HI6H COURT OF CHHATnSSARH AT BILASPUj Singie Bench ; Hon'bie ffi.r. Justice Pritirsker Dlwaker >00 of l! Stste of AAadhya Pradesh Shri Keshav oupta, counsei for the appeitant. Shr" Praveen Das, PL for the State/responden' iOCI <,! ni-) This appeal is directed aaainst the judgment and order dated 21.03.1995 passed by Second Additionai Sessions Judge, Amblkapur in Sessions Trial No. 89/1993 convicting the accused/appeiiant under Section 354 of the Indian Penai Code and sentencing hi,m- to undergo rigorous impr'isonmen* for one W-l}, a 2. Brief facts of the case are that on 5.10.1991 at about a.m. F.I.R. (Ex.P-1) was lodged by the prosecutrix married iady aged about 35 years alleging that on previous day ' at about 9.30 p.m. when s'he had qone to attend the nature's call, ac<2'used/appel!ant reached there, caught hold of her hand, threw'Her on the gr^und with an intention to outrage her modesty. It is aiso biieQed that when'she cried for heip, both of her daughters cams there and they were also beaten by the accused/oppeildnt and thereafter, the accused/appeljant fled '• away..from the spot.-On the basis of this F.I.R., offence under Section'3.54 IPC was registered against the Gccused/appe!lant. On 17.10.1991 case diary statement of the prosecutrix was recorded and there for the first time she had stated that she was subjected fo rape by the accused/oppeliant. After compietion of investigation cha'ilan was -filed on 28.12.1991 under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. So as to hold the accused/appeitant guilty, prosecution has examined as many as 11 witnesses in support of its case. Statement cf the accused/appellant was aiso recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which he denied the charges lev'eiled against him and pieaded his innocence and false implication in the case. 4. After hearing th.e parties the trial Couri' has acquitted the accused/appeliant of the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC but convicted ond sentenced him for the offence punishabie under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code. Hence this aDDeal. 5. Heard counsel for ths parties and perused the material available on record including thejudgment impugned. 6. Courssel for the.appellants submits that that he is not pressing this appeal as for as it relates to conviction part of the impugned Judgmerit and would confine his argument to the ,/ ' sentence pa"t thereof ©nly. According to him, as the ''>«». :accused/appel!cuit is middle aged person, has the family responsibiiity, the incident had taken piace about 19 years back and the fact that appellant has aiready remained in jail for obout fivedays,no useful purpose would be served in se.ndin< himto jaii ahd it would be.in the interest of justice if the senterice' irnposed on him is reduced to the perioci aiready ^sa, '• ^-^ .,/ J '•ay"^y 'i/-"S^N* II undergone by him. To this, counsel for the State has no serious objection. 7. In view of above, the appeal is pari-ly allowed. Conviction part of the impugned judgment is maintained. "Appellant is reported to have remained in jail for five doy-s and the incident had taken place about 19 year^ back, and therefore, his sentence is reduced to the period already undergo.ne by him. However, in lieu . thereof. appeilant is directed to pay ls.5,000/- as fine which wouid be payabie to the prosecu+rix (PVv'-l) before the court below within three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Failure, If any, in depositing the amount before the trial Court within the period stipulated, would ma1<e the appe!!a>it liable to be inside the jail for afur+her period of six months rigorous imprisonment. Appeai thus partiy succeeds. S(»/ Pritinker Diwakcr Jadge '*>».