THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.228 of 2008 26-09-2014 BETWEEN:
Thumma Srisailam …..Appellant AND The State of A.P., rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad.
…..Respondent THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING JUDGMENT:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.228 of 2008 JUDGMENT:
This Criminal Appeal is preferred by the appellant/accused challenging the Judgment, dated 22.02.2008, in S.C. No.197 of 2006 passed by the Hon’ble Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge – cum -
III Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), at L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District, whereby the learned Judge found the appellant guilty for the offence under Section 354 IPC and accordingly sentenced him to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of five (5) years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only), in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three months.
The case of the prosecution is as follows:-
That on 23.04.2006, the appellant/accused who was working as a labourer in the cycle repairing shop has taken away the victim girl, aged 10 years, to his room, and outraged her modesty by touching her private parts, when the victim girl along with her sister went to get bicycles on rent. Meantime, the sister of victim girl, who is aged about 11 years, saw the incident and raised hue and cry. On hearing the voice, the accused left the victim and fled away. Basing on the complaint lodged by the father of the victim, a case was registered against the appellant/accused. After completion of the investigation, the police filed the charge sheet against the accused for the offence under Section 354 IPC.
To prove the guilt of the accused, P.Ws.1 to 10 were examined and Exs.P.1 to P.6 were marked on behalf of the prosecution. No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the accused.
On appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court found the appellant/accused guilty for the offence under Section 354 IPC and accordingly convicted and sentenced him as stated above. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is preferred by the appellant/accused.
Heard the learned counsel for the appellant/accused and the learned Public Prosecutor, and perused the records.
After evaluating and examining the material available on record and considering the respective submissions of the learned counsel for both parties, this Court is of the view that there are no special or adequate reasons, warranting interference by this Court with the Judgment passed by the trial Court.
At this stage, the learned counsel for the appellant/accused confines his argument with regard to quantum of sentence, and submits that as the accused is aged about 65 years and has been suffering from severe ailments, that the accused is having wife and daughter, and he is the only breadwinner in his family, a lenient view may be taken by this Court while imposing sentence of imprisonment.
Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant/accused and the nature of offence, and also in view of long lapse of time, this Court is inclined to take a lenient view.
In the result, the conviction imposed against the appellant/accused by the trial Court for the offence under Section 354 IPC is hereby confirmed. However, the sentence of imprisonment imposed by the trial Court against the appellant/accused under the above head is reduced to two years, while confirming the sentence of fine and default condition stipulated thereunder.
The period already undergone by the appellant/accused shall be given setoff.
The appellant/accused is directed to surrender before the Court concerned on or before 31st October, 2014, to serve the remaining sentence. In default, the Court concerned shall proceed in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is disposed of. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending in this appeal, shall stand closed.
JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO 26.09.2014 pln