Full Judgment
Criminal Appeal No.1113/1997 30.07.2013 Shri D.K.Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Vivek Lakhera, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/ State.
Heard finally.
This appeal has been preferred under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure being aggrieved by the judgment dated 30.11.2006 passed by Special Judge, Raisen in Special Case No.62/1996 whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 366 and 376(1) of I.P.C.and sentenced to R.I.for 5 years and R.I.for 7 years with fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulations.
The facts, in short, are that on 06.01.1996, when prosecutrix (P.W.-1) alongwith appellant was watching the Television, at her home, at about 9 O'Clock in the night, she went out the home to answer the call of nature, appellant followed her and thereafter abducted her on the point of knife.
She stayed whole night alongwith the appellant at the house of relative of the appellant, where he committed rape on her.
Thereafter, appellant took her to his own house, where she was restrained for two days.
When father and mother of prosecutrix came there, she came back to her parental house and lodged the report at Police Station, Raisen.
Offences were registered against the appellant under Section 342, 366, 376, 506 of I.P.C.and Section 3(1) (xii) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).Appellant was prosecuted before Special Judge, Raisen, who framed the charge under Sections 366 and 376(1) of I.P.C.and Section 3(1)(v) of the Act.
Appellant abjured the guilt and pleaded false implication.
After recording the evidence, though appellant has been acquitted from the charge under Section 3(1)(v) of the Act, however, convicted and sentenced as mentioned hereinabove.
Hence, this appeal.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that he does not want to challenge the conviction recorded under Section 366 and 376(1) of I.P.C.by the trial Court.
He further submitted that appellant was in jail from 14.01.1996 and he has already suffered jail sentence of 6 years and 3 months, in the ends of justice would be met, he be sentenced to the period already undergone by him and fine.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/State has supported the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court.
I have perused the impugned judgment alongwith the evidence recorded by the trial Court.
Since the learned counsel for the appellant has not challenged the conviction recorded by the trial Court, same is liable to be affirmed.
Appellant has already suffered jail sentence of 6 years and 3 months.
Considering the special circumstances of the case, wherein prosecutrix was more than 18 years of age and initially they were watching the television till 9 O'Clock, I am of the view that the ends of justice would be met, if the sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by him with fine of Rs.500/-.
Thus, he appeal is partly allowed.
The conviction recorded under section 366 and 376(1) of IPC against the appellant is hereby affirmed.
However, the sentence recorded against the appellant is hereby reduced to the period already undergone by him (6 years and 3 months) with fine of Rs.500/-, which is already deposited.
The appellant is on bail.
His bail bonds and surety bonds stand discharged.
Record of the trial Court be sent back along with a copy of this order for compliance and necessary action.
C.C.as per rules.
(G.S.Solanki) JUDGE gn