Karambir vs State of Haryana

Amarjeet Chaudhary, J.

The appellant was sent up for trial on the charges under Sections 376/511 of the Indian Penal Code.

After the conclusion of trial, Additional Sessions Judge, Jind convicted the appellant under Sections 376/506 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him as under :

Under Section 376(i) IPC: To undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/. In default of payment of fine, the appellant was ordered to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months.

Under Section 506 IPC: To undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months.

All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

Feeling aggrieved against this conviction and sentence, as noticed earlier, the appellant has filed this appeal.

The counsel for the appellant has not argued the matter on merits and has confined his submissions on the quantum of punishment. The counsel has argued that the sentence awarded to the accused is excessive and the same may be reduced to seven years.

We have heard submissions of counsel for the appellant and the Deputy Advocate General Haryana and perused the record.

In order to appreciate the rival contentions, it will be worthwhile to examine the relevant provisions of Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

"376 Punishment for rape (1) Whoever, except in the cases provided for by subsection (2), commits rape shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than seven years but which may be for life or for a term which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to fine unless the woman raped is his own wife and is not under twelve years of age, in which case, he shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years or with fine or with both :

Provided that the court may, for adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgment, impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than seven years.

(2) Whonever,

(a) being a police officer commits rape

(i) within the limits of the police station to which he is appointed; or

(ii) in the premises of any station house whether or not situated in the police station to which he is appointed; or

(iii) on a woman in his custody or in the custody of a police officer subordinate to him; or

(b) being a public servant, takes advantage of his official position and commits rape on a woman in his custody as such public servant or in the custody of a public servant subordinate to him; or

(c) being on the management or on the staff of a jail, remand home or other place of custody established by or under any law for the time being in force or of a women''s or children''s institution takes advantage of his official position and commits rape on any inmate of such jail, remand home, place or institution; or

(d) being on the management or on the staff of a hospital, takes advantage of his official position and commits rape on a woman in that hospital; or

(e) commits rape on a woman knowing her to be pregnant; or

(f) commits rape on a woman when she is under twelve years of age; or

(g) commits gang rape.

shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years but which may be for life and shall also be liable to fine;

Provided that the court may, for adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgment, impose a sentence of imprisonment of either description for a term of less than ten years."

We have perused the judgment of the learned trial Court also and after perusing the same, we find that the case of the appellant falls under sub Section 2(f) which provides that whoever commits rape on a woman when she is under twelve years of age shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years but which may be for life and shall also be liable to fine.

Law prescribes minimum punishment for a term not less than seven years except in the cases provided for by SubSection (2).

Taking into consideration the fact that the accused is unmarried young man; his antecedents; the fact that he is a first offender as no sentence to his credit in the past has been proved, we are of considered view that the sentence of ten years will meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, we reduce the sentence from life imprisonment to rigorous imprisonment for ten years. However, the sentence of fine of Rs. 2,000/ imposed on the accusedappellant by the trial Court and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code is maintained. We also confirm the conviction and sentence of three months'' rigorous imprisonment imposed by the trial Court on the accused under Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code. However, both the substantive sentences of imprisonment will run concurrently.

In the result, the sentence of imprisonment awarded to the accused by the trial Court under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code is modified in the above terms and the appeal is dismissed.