Mallappa vs The State of Karnataka

P.D. Waingankar, J—This criminal revision petition is filed against the order dated 27.01.2010 passed in Crl. A. No. 21/2009 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge, Hukkeri.

The case of the prosecution is that on 23.08.2007 at about 9:00 a.m. when the complainant - Anita was going on a cart road to go to Sri. Vishwanath Katti Pre-University College, Bellad-Bagewadi, the petitioner/accused wrongfully restrained her and in order to outrage her modesty by holding her hand dragged her into a sugarcane plantation of one Tukaram Mahaningappa Parit and pulled her on the ground. She raised hue and cry, thereby one Dundappa - P.W. 4, Basappa - P.W. 5 and Appayya - P.W. 7 rushed towards Anita. By seeing these persons coming towards the spot, the petitioner/accused ran away. The girl informed the matter to her grand mother and thereafter, lodged a complaint before the jurisdictional Police Station. A crime came to registered.

During the course of investigation, the Police recorded the statements of the aforesaid eyewitnesses, apart from the statements of the grand mother and the relatives of the victim girl. She was taken to the Government Hospital at Hukkeri, where she was examined by one Dr. Ashok Pandurang Jirgyal and upon examination, he found no injuries and accordingly, he gave a certificate as per Ex. P5. Upon completion of investigation, charge-sheet came to be filed before the JMFC, Hukkeri against the accused for the offences punishable under Section 341 and 354 of IPC. The accused having denied the charges levelled against him, the prosecution examined P.Ws.-1 to 12, marked Exs-P1 to P8 apart from M.O.s 1 and 2. The learned Magistrate upon hearing the submissions made by the prosecutor and the defence counsel, by the judgment dated 12.2.2009 convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 341 and 354 IPC and sentenced the accused to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- for the offence punishable under Section 341 IPC and to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- for the offence punishable under Sections 354 IPC.

Crl. A. No. 21/2009 filed by accused against his conviction before the Addl. Sessions Judge, Hukkeri came to be dismissed on 27.1.2010. Therefore, this revision petition questioning the legality and correctness of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the Magistrate and confirmed by the Sessions Judge.

I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent. Perused the records.

The prosecution examined the victim girl Anitha as P.W.-3. Her evidence would to go to show that she was studying I year PUC Science at Sri. Vishwanath PU College, Bellad Bagewadi. She used to go by bus and in order to catch the bus, she was required to walk down for a little distance. She used to leave the house at about 9.00 a.m. On 23.8.2007 at about 9.00 a.m. as usual, while she was proceeding by walk on a cart road in order to catch the bus to go to the college and when she reached near the Sugarcane plantation of one Tukaram Mahaning Parit, the accused all of a sudden appeared and caught hold of her hand, she resisted the act of the accused. Even then, he dragged her to the sugarcane plantation and pulled her to ground, at that time, she raised hue and cry. By hearing her hue and cry, her grandmother Kamalawwa and others rushed to the spot and thereby the accused ran away. Though she has been cross-examined at length by the counsel for the defence, nothing concrete has come out so as to disbelieve her evidence. Moreover, no girl would go to the police station to lodge a complaint stating that her modesty has been outraged. Therefore, I have no reason to doubt the veracity of the evidence given by P.W.-3. She has also spoken about having lodged the complaint before the police as per Ex-P3. P.W.-4-Dundappa, P.W.-5-Basappa and P.W.-7 Appayya are the three independent witnesses, who were going by walk on the same road when the incident occurred. They were at a little distance and when they heard the hue and cry raised by the girl, they rushed to the rescue of the girl and thereby the accused ran away. These three independent witnesses have fully supported the case of the prosecution. Further P.W.-6 Kamalawwa is the grandmother of the victim girl. Her evidence is that after hearing the cries of her grand daughter from the land of Tukaram Parit, she rushed to the spot and saw the accused dragging her grand-daughter Anitha into the sugarcane crop of Tukaram and by seeing P.W. s-4, 5 and 7, the accused ran away, P.W.-12 is the Doctor. Immediately after registration of the crime, she was taken to the Government Hospital, Hukkeri, where she was examined by Dr. Ashok and a certificate came to be issued that there was no injuries. P.W.-11 is the Station House Officer, who received the complaint and registered the crime and recorded the statement of the witnesses. P.W.-12-Sattappa is the ASI, who arrested the accused and finally P.W.-9-PSI completed the investigation and filed charge-sheet. Thus the accused wrongfully restrained the victim girl Anitha and outraged her modesty which is established by the prosecution with cogent, convincing and satisfactory evidence. Thus the learned Magistrate and the Sessions Judge on appreciation and re-appreciation of evidence have rightly convicted the accused for the aforesaid offences and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for a period of six months.

I do not see any reason to call for my interference in the impugned judgment passed by the Magistrate and confirmed by the Sessions Judge.

Revision petition is devoid of merit. Hence, the I pass the following:-

ORDER

Revision petition is dismissed.