AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
23 paragraphs · 271 wordsConviction,Sentence,,
Section,Imprisonment,Fine,"Imprisonment in lieu of
fine
363 IPC,3 years R.I.,Rs.500/-,3 months R.I.
366 IPC,3 years R.I.,Rs.500/-,3 months R.I.
376(1) IPC,7 years R.I.,Rs.500/-,3 months R.I.
3(1)12 of
SC/ST(PA)ACT, 1989",6 months R.I.,Rs.500/-,3 months R.I.
3 /4 of Protection of
Children from Sexual
Offences Act, 2012",7 years R.I.,Rs.500/-,3 months R.I.
From the aforesaid discussions, it is found proved that on 27/01/2013 prosecutrix went to the flour mill, for grinding dough, situated at Anjad Naka",,,
from where the appellant took her to village Haribad and committed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix. Thus the prosecution has succeeded in,,,
establishing the fact that the prosecutrix was raped by the appellant.,,,
So far as the sentence is concerned, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant has already served the jail sentence of 5 years",,,
and 6 months, therefore, he prayed that the sentence be reduced to the period already undergone. From the perusal of record it appears that at the",,,
time of the incident the prosecutrix was aged about 14 years and there is minimum sentence prescribed for offence under Section 376 of IPC and 3(1),,,
(12) of SC/ST(PA)ACT, 1989. Further, there is no reason available to reduce the sentence awarded to the appellant, therefore, the prayer made by",,,
the learned counsel for the appellant is not acceptable.,,,
Consequently, upon the aforesaid analysis, the appeal is without merit, therefore, the conviction and sentence of the appellant as mentioned herein-",,,
above is affirmed and the present appeal is hereby dismissed.,,,
A copy of the judgment be sent to the trial Court along with record for information and compliance.,,,
Certified copy as per Rules.,,,