IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CRIMINAL APPEAL No. é; /2oo9 Rupesh Kumar, son o Shri “J Nisghal Das Chanchkmi, aged V abouT 32 years, Occupa’rion‘ Grocery Shop & MarkeTing Business, residenT of Sadar‘ Bazar', Nagpur (Maharashtra), presem‘ly residing at Devpuri, Raipur (C6). APPELLANT: (In Jail) STafe of Chhaffisgarh, Through The Police S’ra’rion New Rajendra Nagar, Raipur. RESPONDENT: RIMINAL APPEAL UNDER SECTION 374g THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 1973 f ( C CONVICTI / ' SENTENCES Under Secfions 376 i 511 of . R I/ for 5 years and paymem‘ of fme of Rs 1 000/ In defaulf of paymenf of fine fo furfher undergo RI/for fhree monfh's respectively. Fine amounf has already been paid vide ' Receipfs dofed 31.12.2008. ' Apa HEéH €OURT OF CHHATTI$5ARH $ILA$E9HR {irimhwi I§pp2ai Naé5 m” 2009 APP LLAN? (In $6M) Rupwh Kama!” Versus RESPON DENT: S‘m‘re of €§1ha$‘Tisgarh 1‘ P05? far arunmncemaw 9f in&anmn‘f m 3! L1“ F£§rmw 20w§2 ‘ 3d]. T.P. SHA Judge mi z HEGH CGUM’ OF CHMATTI$$ARH, E¢31LA3§>Uk {irimimi ,‘fwggai N&.é5‘ m? ZOG9 Rupash Kumav, 5/0 5hri Nischai 3w Chancf'dani, aged abou? 32 yaars, Occupm‘ion Grocery Shmt‘ & :Marke‘ring Businessx, Rio Smdm‘ Bazar, Nagwr‘ (MaharashWa), pressamiy residiag a“? Dev‘puri, Raipur {CG} Versus gEPELLANT: (In Jail} RESPONDENT: S‘ra‘m of Chha'rfisgmh, Through fhe 3 ?oi%ce SmTian Naw Rajamdm Hagar, Raiip‘ur. {Criminai appeal under- 5ac¢§ovg 37$ m‘ The Ceéa mi Crimimi fr‘mcadur‘e, 197.3} Presgm: Mr). RP. Sharma, comma! for The appellant Mr. Samaer Behar, Pamal Lawyer fér' ‘fhe SMw‘e/r‘aspomderw. Simk Benah: Hm'ble s’éim, 7P, 5harma, J EUD§MENT @aiivared on 92 $ February, 2009) 1. Thi$ appeai is. direcfaci ogaiasf fhg judgmgm‘ of convici'iom and order of $gManca da‘fed 31—12—2008 passgd by we Sessitms Judge, Raipur in m) Se3sioms Triai N030f2008, whereby geamad .‘3gssions Judge afwr‘hohiing (J 'fhe accused/appaihn? guilfy far commission of offence under 5eci’ion 3%: remé wwh Secfin'n 511 0f Tha IPACA, semamced him To undargo RX. #50:" fivca year’s & my fina of asiGGO/m in de’fau]? of gqymam'r of firm ‘ra furfhar undargo RL for fhr‘ea mon+h$. 2. Judgmm’f of convicTiQn i3 chaHengad on fhe ground ”rim? wi’rhau? (my €vidama relm'ing 1'0 m‘mmw in commi'? rape? agaimf “the éppelian? “k‘ha Crgur? below has conwc‘mé & gan'hamcam' ‘i‘ha appeHam and fharaby aammi??ed iilegaiiw. 3‘. Cage. of fr‘rle @rosecu?§w, in brief, is ‘Hna? 0n 309-200? a? abom‘ 9 mm. fha pr‘csecuh‘ix, aged abau‘r $ yagws4 was playimg mar The house which was uneiar mns?ruc*i'iom Jiha accusea‘ wam‘ agar 1‘he prosacu’rrix, Teak her imside R) c: vacarr)" worn, awressed h§ms£W & ‘rkg prosacufrix, lay her dawn (m fha amm ‘ am W was afrfamp‘mg To mmmh' mm an hem. While 1“,“)a accused was “raking 'fha pm$2£mr%x ‘mwcmds a‘ha rrmm, Takwhwar (PW—4) objecfea‘ him Cmcl §mmec§§nfaiy mm away (Jana! in‘fermad To ‘a‘Emz bvofher 0f “the pramwi‘rix name§y, Ash: §am (PW—3). Ashn iQam {PW-3L Takeshwar (PW—4) & fxiicmfmm mamhed 'i‘owar'ds The piaca cw? imidam' and 3m»! f‘na'r 'fhe mutused was &?‘2“am§r§'ireg h) cammi? Paigm or; "We prva$ecuwix They mughi‘ hoki sf ?ha accusadA A'sha Qam {?\Ai~-3) immadiawiy godgad ”fm report same was wri‘?‘mw 3V1 Daha‘fi NaEigi/‘xi Exp—2 card om f‘na basis m'f Dahmi Nm3$hL F332; Ex~P~§ was ragimerzd. Tha pregamw‘rix was sam‘ for madim‘l exan’sina‘?imn Vida EXP—é cmé ska iim$ examimad §z>y “H12. demon N43 injury was foum‘z cm %,irm pmsacufwix. Ha.“ $acom§ary iiaxuai chamwzr‘s were“: no‘i’ devaiopedi hymgn was Em‘ac‘h m M’wwml injury was {wand over her priva‘re gawk and vagina daeg no? admi‘i‘ even (me fiiagw. Twv siidas were prepared from fhe vagina (if Tim pwsecu‘iwix cmd harsded aver "r0 The Poiica. Th2 accused was “rakém in‘h’s cusioa‘y vide EXP-43 Ha was 3W1? for medicai exai’nim'iion. He was ammiaeci by Dr. i1. Dwrm (:’W~i) Vida ExP~1 whit; apimd i’hm‘ fhg accua‘ed is capabia fw cemmiffing saxuni iniercoursa. $913? map wag prepawad viii-:2; EXP-3. {Task car'f‘ificm‘e§ EMF“? :3z R10 wane saizeci Vida EX.P~8. f,ms fiiazd bafor’e i‘rsa Affer compiaw‘ion e'f ima$+igafism c2'mr'ga shaé‘? Special Judge, Raipur win: 52m line case ‘m ‘ri'w. Com? of Sessions. liq order 1‘0 prove The gull? cl“ The accused/apgelimf, 14w masacufiwn has £31 examiiied as; mamy as six wiwe$azéi S‘ral'amen? 9f “rm: accused was: racwdad umle?‘ 5ac1‘iun 313 0'35 i‘laa Cr.?.€. m which ha diamacl "Hag circLliTl$€umgs appearmg agaims'i' i’sim, plaaéaa‘ immc'amce :31 falSe impiica‘?im. The accusaza§ lms examined an MK. $ahu (DW—l) cl: Pawcm Chanchlani (DW- 2) —~ brm‘her m‘ fhe accusacl, in his dgfancal wlw have deposed ’rl’lm‘ “{he accuged is suffering fmm psycho‘ric disordar as a nasul“? of consumpfion of liquor", he was admii'wd m Eigkahnm mad was: di3§harged Vida ExD—i. I imva heard learned cauwel fax" Ema pm‘iigs cmd peru$ad The judgmem‘ gx in'ipugmacl a3 C1136; fine: wawrd a‘f “Hm CGur‘i balaw, 7. Mi“. B‘P. Shawna, 32ame¢§ c0unsa§ f9?" we appgHanT, submi‘tg fhcd' appeHcmf Rugiash Chmchéani is a pa‘i'ian? of gaycho'ric diSGi‘der‘ and he was uada‘r' Tmzo‘l'mmn" in ‘é‘ha Medicai Coiiage & Magpifal under Dr. MK. 5ahu from 30— 1—2008 fa) 2—2—2008. He i$ sugarmg fr'em aicoho! dependence havirxg hi£+ery of alcmha! induced psychM‘ac disarder. Learned coun§el fux‘fhar submim f’rxaf ‘:‘ha 2v3danca adducad (m bahaif 01" The pmsacmion is n0? suf'fi(:ieri' fat" dmWMg (my im‘farama i‘hm‘ +he accusaci hm a??amp+ed ”m commi“? mirm cm “kw prosacui'rix, bm‘ €412 evidenca adduced gm behaif of Tha prwaw‘rim’s is guggas‘frive a“? ?§ae 15am Was? frhg appdian?’ whosz mama] pesifim is; ma‘i‘ 'rm‘r‘mid, mas ugad miminai ”fm'ca 1‘0 ou‘i’mge ‘r'rne. madesfy of a wa‘man which is punishgtbla undar $a$§w 354 of Tha LD .C. m: .5. Lmciar Seci'm'n 37é read w§f§1 Sacficm 511 of fha ERG. Laamad‘ comsgi a§s0 Submim 'f‘na‘i‘ ‘i*ha appellcm? w&£ 3m cusi‘ady from 1—10—2001? 1‘0 4-1—2008 and 15mm 31—12—2008 ‘t'iH "faday La. for abwui‘ :4 morif‘ms .12 days. Ha piacad reliance m The ma??er sf .‘xmm Kumm" em eea‘fker‘ v. $4m1'e cf Heryam“ , irl whieh i1“ has beam heM by fhe Apex Cam? “fhm‘ effence of wfemwing +0 cammif mpe is dis’rénc? ¥r0m imjecem assaufh Endecewf assau!?s are ofmm magnéfied in'rc s+?e?np1‘$ m" Page. The Caurfs are required 'm scrufinize ‘fhe evidence Furi‘her reHamm has been phaed in The mariner 0‘? §hurj§ $i’o Kumbha and a'mers v. 3mm cf :WRg in which fhe Medhya Pradesh H§gh {Tour‘l' has he’d 4mm puliing The prn$ecu?r§x and fryimg ’fo remove her dress 'For sexuai Ewiercoursée dates :rm‘t' was? Tm’e ‘rhe offence of a‘h‘en‘P? 1‘s commif rage, bu? such ac? is iiebie for ou‘rmging “(he made5’ry of a weman purisha‘nle under Secr'ien 354 of f‘ne IRC. 8. On "t’rae sfher ‘aand, karned courage! appeerirg on behalf e‘f The STm‘e/ respandem supperkd The judgmerx’r cyf 'Hne Courf beiow and submrrred 'f‘na'r “me. prwetcufioh has preved 3% mse beyond ail reasonable doubfs. Evidence m‘ The prosecurrk q§ turner wirnesses inspire confidence and > i’rLS'rwar‘fhy, sufficieM far drawing infereme The? fhe appeiimrl' has mo“? used arimimii rorce wi‘rh inren‘r ’ro auimge The mode§iy af ’rhe prosecufrix, bu? hc£ tyi'femwed r0 cemmi? rage gm. iier. Learned counsel placed reliance 1 (woe) 4 scc 37a» 2 rsrm nuxi}? r1} r \ ilzLriuJ. a n i300 I 14 x a rq mah‘er a? Vishnu v. 5fa?e m: *J‘aé“,a Pnadesh3 in which if has ham haw by “the .MP. H§§h Cam? 'Hm‘? fha prosacuwix d§ accused ware. Mng um’ressed and We appaiiam was Eying over ":‘he prosacmrix/ offémce. Lma‘er“ $ac+i¢n 376 read wi’?h SzC‘Ham 511 of fhe IP..C. is made eu‘? agaihsi' 1412 appellant 9. Ira order 'I'o appreciafe The conmh‘fmm‘ of fhe par‘i’ias and 1‘13 2sm§§§i$h i‘ha compéiciw 9f ”rhea upgeiimf m ‘fha crime m quesfian, I have. examined ‘i‘ha avii'iema: acMucad cm bahaif af fhe prosaauhtara. . Aga of 'E‘he 'glhogacufr'ix ahcuf E3 yaaws is n0”? ::%is3pm"ad hy we. Qgfanaa. Oh The G’rhar hcmé, u‘ha Cwr‘i‘ has wcar‘raiwgd fha aga ef hag prosecwréx as 3 yaarg, Tha pmgggw‘?’rix {PW—2) has dgpasad #hw a? We Time. of imidam ghe Ww goihg ‘i‘x: $¥rmp far purcehming camé’am mi, “Hm? accumd ma? her on ‘rha way and “wok: har- To ma hoom Wham he capaneid har imégrwaar am 1m; hem dommi a? ’rha“? Tim‘a, har bm‘fha?‘ Ashm Qam cmm: whemupan “fhe accua‘gzf5 'Fkad away from :‘ha g’paf. Thaa Paiicra sm‘f har f0 fharhaswmk 11. Tal<e$hwar (PWwé) has dapwed a‘hm‘ m fha cala‘re 0f ihcMem‘ ha: wag comihg from 'l’ha $hapt m“ Thaf hme The mccwsed was dmggihg 1‘ha progacuTPEX “fmticxrds a hwga, he abjgc‘red 7‘0 i‘i’ an which f’na acaus‘ed scaldad him whawaupon ha ram “mwards 'i‘ha bra?‘rier‘ 0f Tha prosaw‘i'rix Asha Ram. He alwg wi‘i'h A$h<z Ram m Mammm immadiamiy rushad "mwards fhe house Wham hag accused & The? progacufr‘éx wemz Lmd‘r‘eased, Thay (:augh'f‘ holcx’ of 1A ‘fhe acc1.i$ed. g 12. Agha 26m (WV-3) has dapwad fhm‘ ha was ihfohmed by Takashwcah (?W-4) Ju'5am ‘L one {garggh hag mkzm ‘l'hz pho§a¢u+ri>§ inwards a haLiSa an wh§ch ha mlawg w‘i’rh Tax§<a$hmmr ”Lwhed fommhds fhc‘dr house where They saw Tha‘? Tha ac<:u$s>,c§ was LmdrBSsad, fhe pmmci‘wrix was $50 uhdressgd and Th2 acmsaad lay *rhez pmkmcuw'ix an +ha flmr' and ha was Jn‘yihg To Iay ovar her. H2 iodgad “aha repem‘ yia:1a EXP—2. Th2 ?o!ica praparad spoi' map Vida EXP— 3. He cohsahhd for madkal zxamihmion of haw sis‘fer Vida EXP-4. e As'm Qam {PW-3) ha$ s‘m‘red in para 4 01F his crags-axaminaiiw iha‘r fine 1!; accused 64 The pmsacufrix ware found iii ma room whiah was wi‘i‘hou? dear. He. has aiso admii‘rad in par-a 6 fha? he caiiad The pergong and aista Tha Poiiw, when The Polica cama ihta accused shouiad mid wen? insida ‘i‘he baihroom whergupon gfier @“eukirig The. door, The Pciice “wok, oui‘ fhe. accumii :Fmm 'rhe baiiimom mid Teak him fa ‘i’he Peiice Siaiion. ‘ gz) 5 13. Sushi! Kumar (PW—R), Head Cons'mbia 64 5hnshi Mohcm Singh (PW—6), Addéi‘ional Supzbaimendan‘i' of ?oiica QM. 5ecuri‘l‘y, have suppormd fhe fac:1'um 0f invesfiga‘i’ian. ~. Dr. V. Du'H'a {PW—1) has si'l'meci 'rhaf ha has examinad fha amused Vida EXP—1 and 'feLmd "ki’m‘f “Hm acausfezi was capabk To commi‘? $exua! infercoursg. The pmSecuWix was examined by Dr. Suroj @xamharw Vida Ex.P»6, bLa‘l‘ fhe pmsecufiem MS m“? eaxamineté ‘l’ha dcczfar wha hmi axaminad $12 pmszacufr‘ix, %mweva‘:‘, her madico! rep-'ar’r ghows Tha? m injury wzw “Fmmd ovar he?” bGdy 9r priuma gxar'r. Ascwding f9 fhe reparf, hymgn of fag prwecwrix wm: inmcf cmci' hem sewmiar‘y sexua! chm‘acmrs wet? no'r daveiapad ‘v’agim daais rlo+ sadmi‘? even ona fingera These are suggesfivra of +he fac‘r “mm“ ‘3'he masacuh‘ix has m? been subjec‘md fa rape. w saxuai infercaursa. 15. The prosacwmx (?W«2) has admifi’ed in para 2 of har crws—zxaminafion .Tha’r fha assussad was pr'aviausiy m? kmown 'i'o her, bu‘r The amused usati T9 provide c’rmcnicmzs £4 bigcuifs +0 her and bve har iika a chiki. On The daft? 9f iwddenf, The accused ‘mak her inside a room where m ofher persom was preseWr, bu? cm'lsh‘uci’ion work was geiing on in Thui' hausxa. She. has deniad ‘i‘he suggesfian Thai she is making faise. smmmem. 17. Take$hwnr (PW-4) ha$ admiifgd in palm 3 af his‘ cm$s-examim‘rion fhai ihg accused has moi quarmiled wif'r: any pergarx. He has: ai3o a&mi'h‘ed i’n pum 5 i'ha‘? Wham Poiica came, "rhe amusad was showed and Toid firm? ha I’ms m? c0mmi‘??ed anyi'hing. Accbrding 1'0 The evidencce of The prasew’i'rix (PW~2), The. accusad opened her Lmderwmr and lay her down on 'i‘he iand, ai’ ‘i'ha'i‘ Timsz, hgr hm‘rhar cama, hm” asmrding "i0 ‘fha evidema of Asha Ram (mfg/«3} — hroi'har m‘ fhe. pmsacuirix (8g Takeshmmr (PW-4),. 'ihe accuSed hae removed his cio‘ihes as aiso fhe cioihes 01F ‘fhe prosecu'rr-ix amt! a‘fier‘ iaying her 0h i‘he iand, he wnss‘ jug“? in a posii'ion is si‘i aver her. Ashe Ram {PW—3), who hag iadged Dehmi Naiishi, has specificaiiy siaieci in Deimii Naiiszhi (ExP-Z) ‘i'hm‘ when he wewi inside The roam he saw The? ihe accuseré (3g +he prosecm‘r'ix were undre$$eci (naked) and offer iaying “The prosecu’rrix ciawn, ihe amused was sii'iihg over ihe prosecu‘i‘rix and was haying To wm‘mi’r rape an her. Ashe: 12am (PW—3) has supiporied ihe versiah given in Dehai‘i Naiishi {ExP-Z)‘ Takeshwar {PW-4) hae suppori'ed The ver3ion of iii$ha Ram (PW—3). The prosecufrix (PW—2) is a Teenager child, ageci abQuT 8 yearS, ghe has i’ioT sTctTeai ThaT The appeiianT was noT naked or he has 310’? remcved her clm‘hes m" he wa$ mo‘f “rm/mg ‘fo Si? avar' bar. reqmmd ’ra $cr‘u'finiza ‘fha avidema minu‘hzly. Judgmen‘? mud Thus “10. An m'i'emp'? “m camm§f {m affence is an act or a series of ac‘rs, which ieads inevi'mbiy f0 fhe comm%ssion of The offence, uniesg $omef’ni'ng, whiéh ’rhe doer' of ’r’ne acT neifher- faresmn; nor infandad, happans 1’0 prayer}? fhis. An a?femp‘r may be degcribed 1'9 be an acT dong in parf-execufion of a cr‘imm‘i: design, amvunfiw To more “khan mere preparation bu? faiimg shor‘r of ac‘fuai consumma‘i’ion, andl poswssing, exsapf for faiiura To consumma‘ra‘ a” The alemerrfs of i‘he subsmnfive crime. In ofher‘ wortis, an a‘Hamp‘r aon:3i$‘l's in i1“ The infer}? To commi‘l‘ a crime, faliing sham‘ of, its acfual commissian. I“? may consequen’riy be viefined as Thaw which if noT preven‘i’ed wouid have regui‘ied in "the ‘fuii censummm‘ion ef The ac? m‘famnfed. The iiiusfmfions givei'i in Seciion 511 cieariy simw 'i‘he iegisia‘x‘ive ini‘eni‘ion to make a dif‘ferewce bafwgen ihe msas of a mere preparafian and an a‘rfampf. 11. In order ‘io find cm acgused guiiiy of am afiempi with imam +0 commi’r a rape, couri has i0, be saiisfied Thai 'ihe accused, whzn he iaid heid of Th2 prosecuirix, ruoi only desired To gmfify his passions upon her- persan, bu? Thai he infended‘ f0 do so ctr aii mam-s, and notwi'ihgamiing any resismnca 0n her part Indecan‘i assauii's are offer} magnified info a‘h‘emp‘is a? mpa. in ér'deh ‘ro crime Tc a conciusioh fhcif ihe cohducf of The accused was indica‘iive 0'? (x deierminm‘ion ‘i’e gm'ii'fy his 18. In The case of #imen iifumqr (were), The wax. CourT whiie dealing wiTh The case m? CiTTempT Ti) canimiT m‘pe and indecehT assauiT heiti ThaT same Times ig'iciecehi' aeeiauiis are magaified ihi’o a‘h‘empfs a? rape and ‘i'he Caum‘ is Paras v10 (3:. 11 at? ihe 33 y passion a? «3H evenw, and in spi'rz 0f cdl resismma, maferiak mus? exist Surrounding c§rctjmsfances many fimes ’rh row beacw lig‘m on fha‘l’ aspect“ 19. In fha casa of Bhur’éi (wwa), The amused has nm‘ rameved his cla‘rhas, bu? has Triad ‘m mmova ’rhe drags m" Tha prosecufrix and could no? succeeri TO ramova ha?" drass. Bu? i‘n fha presem‘ case, We accused a3 removad his ab‘i‘has and also removad Tha’cloihas of fhe prasecu‘irix tmd afier iayimg her ow ’rhr: kind, ha wag jusi si‘H'irig over ’nar‘. Tha case of Bhw‘ii (wpm) is disiinguishabia m1 fac+s it: Thai of The presen‘r ca$e. 20. Iri‘ieniim 1‘0 commii’ offerica differs: fmm a‘rfempi fa commi‘i offence; bamusa in‘hanfion ’m commi‘i‘ G‘f‘fancg is fii‘sf s’i’age in commisriiori cf crime. h avery crime, ihere is fir-sf, inhan‘rim it: cemmii‘, semndly, pra‘pam’iion ”m mmmii, Hairdiyi a‘Hampa‘ To cammi‘r iii. If The fhir‘d smgei ’rhm‘ is, aimmp‘i is sm:<:a$sfu§, “fi’ian “(ha mime. is campizfe. A cuiprif firs? in'l'arids 'i'o commi? ihca. afknca, “rhea makgs pretpamirim for commi‘Hing i? and 'ihzr-aafiar a‘iieamp'm 1’0 cammi‘i‘ ‘Hqe offance. If ‘iha a‘i‘iemp‘? succeada he has commii":ed ‘i'he offama; if i’r faiiss dua “m ragsaiw bayonrj hi$ coniml, ha is said To have ai‘iampmizi ‘i’o commii‘ fha of‘fenae. A‘H‘empi To commii‘ an offence can be said fo begin when Tim pmparaiions are compie‘m and ‘rha culpri? commences ~ro do soma'i'hiizg wii‘h The infan’riori of commii‘fing The. offanca and which is a siap ‘mwards ihe commission of The offeme. The momam ha commencss ‘ro do an ac? wi‘rh The necessary inferihon, he commehces his ww‘emw *io commii fhe offence. 21 131 “ihe insmm case, fhe appeiian‘i Took 'i‘he prosecu‘i’rix ’ro a lonely place irésisrie a mom where he undressed himself and also ‘ihe prosecu‘i‘r‘ix. Afier laying her on fhe floor, “the accused was Jusi ”irying io si'i ovi‘a‘r' hex”, ai 'i'ho‘i‘ “iime; he was cough? by i‘he broi‘her of ihe prosecu‘irix (S; o'rher wiinesses. This shows shad wifh‘ in’rem‘ion *fo commi? fhe offeme of rape +he accused prepared himseif by uodressing himself and also uhdr‘essing the prosecu‘i‘rix and af‘mr layihg her on ‘ihe floor, he Tried io sii' over her. If he was no? cough? by *ihe bro‘l’her of The prosecufrix $4 others, he mus“? have succeeded in ‘rhe commission of offence of rope. Foci‘s of ‘rhe presehf case ore suggesfive of fhe focf ‘i‘ha‘r ‘i'he opipellon'r has no? fried To ou‘imge fhe modesfy of a woman, bu? had offempfeci To commif rope or} i? mm her. In Thi$ casa, indecen'r assauH' has m? been modified inTo (Wramm a1- rGp$‘ 22.Evic1anc2 of 'The prosecu’rrix & *he wi‘messes inspire confidance and fhay are ‘i'ms’rwar‘rhy. The avidencz adduced w bahalf of ’rhe pmsaCLWimw is sufficiam f9 dmw in‘fer‘ance fha’f “fine accus€d has u‘i'wmpi'ed i‘o ccmmi? rape on The pmsacu’rrix. 23.As r‘ggards p$ychofic diswder or abnarmai mama] condi’i’ion of Tha accused, Di". MK. 5ahu (DW-l) has $Pacificahy $1’m‘ad iii his aviale’mcra hm? ih The case of psychofic ciésarder‘ we persm wauid n01“ ba m a posi‘rion f0 dacide righ'r or wrong, bu? ha found symp'mms of anxie’ry in The appaliam” and no sympfcms of psychohc dimr‘dgr were found in him‘ This sshaws Jrhcvr a’r fha 1’ime of cammissioh of offenca The accLIsed was nm‘ abhormaa and he was ho‘r suffer‘ihg from any psychofic disordzr‘ 24.Af1‘er appreciafing fhe avidence avaihbla on record, "rhe Cour‘r beiow has convica‘ed ’rhe appeHcm? under Sacfion 37$ read wi‘I‘h SecTio'n 511 of ‘fhz LRC. ConvicTion of The appzHcmf is susmimbia undar +ha law. 25.145 regards ‘ihe quzsiion 0f sani'ence, learhecl Sessions Judge sanienced i'he appeiivm’r To undergo RI. for five; years 84 pay fine of Rs.1,00G/-, in defouii of paymeni‘ of fine To furfhar undergo RI. for Thraa mon’ihs. in criminal cases seni’encing par? is a very cruciai aspec? and fhe Cour‘is mus’r deal wi‘ih This aspec? wi'ih circumspec‘iion. The Supreme Cour? 'm ‘rhe case of Sushi! Murmu v. Sfa‘i’e of Jharkhand4 has poin‘ied oui reievanf i considerafions for defermina‘iion of seniehce ihm‘ The personaiiw of fhe offender as reveaied by his age, charac'rer, ariiececienfs and other circumsfances ana‘ ‘iraceabili'i’y of fhe offender f0 reform mus? necessariiy piay fhe mos? prominem role im defermining i'he senfence. A judge has To balance The personaiii'y of The offender wi‘i‘n fhe circumsfances, si‘iuafioris ahd fhe reacfions and choose ‘ihe appropriafe seni'ence To be imposeo. Again in fhe case of Devnamyon Mandai v. 51am of U.P.5 (para 8) fhe / Supreme Cour? has held fhaf fhe senfence awarded shouid be nei‘i‘her exoessively harsh nor riaiculously low. The Cour? has To hear in mind The III 4 AIR 2004 sc 395 5 2094 (7) sec 257 primigia of pm’paM’iamHTy. The gravi'ry af +ha offame, mmmzr‘ at? commissiun of crime, age mad sex <31“ ‘Hqa accuw’d shouid baa ‘méazn im‘c: accoun'f. Thus, 19% d§scra+km givan by The sfm‘mz f0 ‘khe Cour"? fm‘ cwwiimg +h€ wwfence cmmof be exercised arbifmriiy. The {Jauws are required 'fo baiance fhe personali‘ry of The affem‘er wé’rh i'he circumsfances. 26.1n the ins'mn‘f caee, evidence of *?he grosecm‘ima wimeeees reveals “i'hm” whee ‘fhey caugh? ?he accused, caHed far 7‘he P01ice am§ 1*he Pchce came fhe caccused 3‘mr"?ec§ 5hau‘fing am} lashy he eh'i‘ered imo ha‘rhroom, fhereaf‘mr, “fhe Pohee 'mok ou? i'he accused by breaking The diver 5f i-‘he baihmom. This ac? of The accused shoaw *rhe sigh of anxie‘ry. The appehahi’ iE aged abou? 31 years. Takihg im‘o considera‘rivh “rhe drcumsfcmces 3n which ‘ihe o‘ffeme 0f afiempf m cammif rape has been commi’r'ied, I am of The apinion has? ’rhe senience imposeé upon The uppeiicm‘t requires recensidemfion cmd 50% of The minimum senfence prescribed for commissicm of The offence of rape Le. haif 0f 7 years & fime would be sufficiem in fhis case. 27.931“ The foregoing reasons, “the appeai is parfiy oHowed. Canvici’iah 9f "The appeiian‘f uhder Sec‘rion 376 read wifh Eacfion 51.1 0f Jrhe LRC. is msinmined. Sentence of ‘rhe oppeiimi is modified. Ensifeoci of $2.11 for five years & fine of Rs.1,000/—, ihe oppeiisn‘r is serafenced f0 undergo Rl. for 3% years & pay fine of Rs.1,000/,—, in defaui‘r of paymen'r of fine 'io furfher undergo RI. for fhree moh’rhs. Sdl- T.P. SHARMA Judge i i i i i i i i i i