Roopji @ Krishna vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Hon''ble Justice Shri N.K. Gupta

The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 23.07.2012 passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Balaghat in ST. No. 48/2012 whereby the appellant was convicted for the offence punishable u/s 354 of I.P.C. and sentenced for one year''s simple imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine three months simple imprisonment was directed. The prosecution case in short is that on 03-04-11, at about 12:15 p.m. in the evening, the prosecutrix (PW-1) was playing with other children in the locality at village Swathi Police Station Kirnapur District Balaghat. The appellant went to the spot and he gave some money to the brother and sister of the prosecutrix and thereafter, he picked up the prosecutrix and took her in a room and he promised her to pay a sum of Rs. 200/- and thereafter, he removed the underwear of the prosecutrix and lay upon her. On shouting of the prosecutrix her maternal grandmother came to the spot and thereafter, the appellant ran away. On 04-04-11, an FIR was lodged by Laxmi Bai (PW-2), the grandmother of the prosecutrix and thereafter, a case was registered. After due investigation, a charge-sheet was filed before the JMFC, Balaghat who committed the case to the Sessions Judge, Balaghat and ultimately it was transferred to the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Balaghat.

The appellant abjured his guilt. He did not take any specific plea and no defence evidence was adduced.

The learned Additional Sessions Judge after considering the prosecution evidence convicted the appellant for the offence punishable u/s 354 of IPC and sentenced as mentioned above.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

On considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, it is apparent that the appellant does not want to challenge the conviction directed against him but he prays for reduction of the sentence. It is apparent from the record that the appellant was less than 21 years of age at the time of incident and therefore, he was to be released on probation. An application for compromise was submitted by the grandmother of the prosecutrix before the trial court. The appellant was the first offender. Under such circumstances, it is not a case where the appellant could be sent to jail for his overt act. If he is not released on probation then, sentence of fine was sufficient upon him. Hence, it would be proper to set aside the jail sentence directed by the trial court.

On the basis of the aforesaid discussion, the appeal filed by the appellant is hereby partly allowed. The conviction directed against the appellant for the offence punishable u/s 354 of IPC is hereby maintained but, jail sentence is hereby set aside. No change in the fine amount. The appellant has deposited the fine amount before the trial court.

At present, the appellant is on bail. His presence is no more required before this court and therefore, it is directed that his bail bond shall stand discharged. A copy of the judgment be sent to the trial Court along with its record for information and compliance.