Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1972 (3) TMI 111

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ven years' Rigorous Imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100/-, and, in default of payment of fine, to three months' further rigorous imprisonment. The appellant, aged about 20 years at the time of the alleged offence of 9th of August, 1969, was the youngest of three persons who were jointly charged and tried for offences punishable under Section 366 and 354 I.P.C. 2. The prosecution case was : Kumari Seema, a girl below 18 years of age, was offered a lift on his bicycle by the accused, Kamal Singh, aged 30 years, while she was returning to her home from her School on 9th August, 1969. The girl hesitated. But, as she reposed confidence in Kamal Singh, whom she looked upon as her uncle, she accepted the offer. Kamal Singh took Kumari Se .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... about the incident. This led to a communication of information of the offences to the Police which went to the tourist's bungalow and arrested the three accused who were brought to Police Station Nalcha where a First Information Report was lodged. 3. The Trial Court had examined the evidence given in support of the case stated above. This included medical evidence on the question of the age of the girl, because, while the prosecution alleged that she was below 16 years of age, the accused pleaded that she was above 18 years of age. Evidently, the case of the accused was that Kumari Seema was a consenting party to whatever took place. Although the girl was attending a School, the entry of her age in the School Register was not disclo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ellant, and his companion Punam. The three accused were, therefore, convicted under Section 366, and each was sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment. The two accused Shiv Govind and Punam were also convicted under Section 354 I.P.C., and sentenced to four months rigorous imprisonment, but the two sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 6. When the case came up in appeal to the High Court, a notice of enhancement of the sentence under Section 366 I.P.C. was issued to each of the three appellants, and their sentences were enhanced, as indicated above, after the appellants had been heard. 7. It is only Shiv Govind who has appealed to this Court. Shiv Govind had also applied under Section 561A. Criminal Procedure Code to th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... made to get down at the tourist's bungalow. It seems, however, from the account of the occurrence given in the Judgment under appeal, that the learned Judge was shocked by the plight of Kumari Seema, due to the perfidy of Kamal Singh, and by a contemplation of the possible consequences to her if she had not behaved in a particularly brave and intelligent manner go as to escape from her predicament. The learned Judge mentioned that the girl had risked her life to escape. We, however, find that there was no suggestion in the evidence anywhere that any threat to the life of Kumari Seema was held out. There was no evidence that the girl had seriously struggled to escape or had raised shouts for help which would have brought people around t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ent. Interference is only called for when it is manifestly inadequate. In our opinion, these principles have not been observed. It is impossible to hold in the circumstances described that the Sessions Judge did not impose a substantial sentence, and no adequate reason has been assigned by the learned High Court Judges for considering the sentence manifestly inadequate. In the circumstances, bearing all the considerations of this case in mind, we are of opinion that the appeal (which is limited to the question of sentence) should be allowed and that the sentence imposed by the High Court should be set aside and that of the Sessions Court restored. 10. We think that what was laid down by this Court in Bed Raj's case (Supra) is fully a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates