JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal is directed against the judgment dated the 29th April, 1985, of the Sessions Judge, Bhilwara, convicting and sentencing the appellant under Section 354 I.P.C.to 9 months, rigorous imprisonment & under Section 324 I.P.C. to 10 months' rigorous imprisonment. Both the sentences have been directed to run concurrently. 2. The case relates to the incident, which took place on July 22, 1983 at about 11.30 P.M. Mst. Munni wife of Kandan Sansi, resident of Lawman Colony, on her way to her sister's house in Sanganer colony had stopped at the Roadways Depot of Bhilwara The accused appellant who is a Rickshaw puller spoke in a Sansi dialect and offered to take her to the place of her destination in his Rickshaw. On this Mst. Munni mounted the Rickshaw. The accused drove the Rickshaw for some distance on the Sevasadan road. Abruptly, he stopped the Rickshaw, took out a knife and threatened her to fulfil his desire. He placed the knife on her neck. She resisted and received injuries by the knife on her hand. When she started crying, the accused put his hand on her mouth, fell her down on the ground to commit illicit inter-course with her. Her cries attracted Nemichand and Udhistar towards that side. The then accused sped away in his Rickshaw. She received injuries on her left hand. Nemichand and Udhistar then accompanied her to the Roadways Depot. The accused, however, continued roving round the place. Smt. Munni was upset and frightened. The prosecution case further is that Ghasee Lal and Kalyan Mal, police constable on horeses, happened to come there. She narrated her story to them and pointed towards the accused. One of the police-men recognised him and said that he was Maliya Punjab, the Badmash. Both Smt. Munni and the accused were taken to the police station. The first information report of the occurrence was lodged by Mst. Munni at police station, Kotwali and a case under Sections 366,376/511 and 324 I.P.C. was registered against the accused. The accused was arrested. On examination of the body of Mst. Munni, Dr. Fateh Singh Choudhary found three incised wounds on her left hand. After investigation, a charge-sheet against the accused-appellant was filed in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhilwara, who committed him to the Court of Sessions to stand for trial for the offence mentioned above. 3. The accused was arrested. On examination of the body of Mst. Munni, Dr. Fateh Singh Choudhary found three incised wounds on her left hand. After investigation, a charge-sheet against the accused-appellant was filed in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhilwara, who committed him to the Court of Sessions to stand for trial for the offence mentioned above. 3. The Sessions judge, Bhilwara, charged the accused for the offence under Sections 366, 354 and 324 IPC. The plea of the accused was recorded to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. As many as eight witnesses were examined by the prosecution. The most important one is the evidence of PW 8 Mst. Munni. Other witnesses, namely PW I Nemichand, PW 2 Chunni Lal,PW 4 Gheesa Lal and PW 5 Kalyanmal, are supporting witnesses. Her testimony further finds support from the evidence of Dr. Fateh Singh Choudhary, who examined her injuries. The accused in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. denied the prosecution allegations and stated that he had been falsely implicated as he had got the husband of Smt. Munni arrested in a case of illicit liquor. 4. After trial, the learned Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the accused, as aforesaid. The learned Sessions Judge disbelieved the prosecution case that Mst. Munni was kidnapped or abducted with intent that she may be forced to illicit intercourse. The charge of abduction was held not proved against the accused and he was acquitted for the offence under Section 366 IPC The learned Sessions Judge, however, held that the accused used criminal force to Mst. Munni with intent to outrage her modesty and that the accused caused injuries by a knife on the persons of Mst. Munni. The learned Sessions Judge accordingly convicted the accused appellant for the offence under Sections 354 and 324 IPC and sentenced him as aforesaid. 5. The accused has preferred this appeal to this Court through Jail. He was unrepresented and therefore, Mr. Suresh Kumbhat was appointed amicus curiae to conduct the case for the appellant. Shri Kumbhat has appeared as amicus curiae and has argued the case on his behalf. The evidence of Mst. Munni and another supporting witnesses has been read over to me. The accused has preferred this appeal to this Court through Jail. He was unrepresented and therefore, Mr. Suresh Kumbhat was appointed amicus curiae to conduct the case for the appellant. Shri Kumbhat has appeared as amicus curiae and has argued the case on his behalf. The evidence of Mst. Munni and another supporting witnesses has been read over to me. She has stated that when she was at the Roadways depot on her way to her sister's house in Sanganer colony, the accused, Rickshaw puller, offered to take her to her sister's house in his Rickshaw. She mounted his Rickshaw. He took the Rickshaw on Sarraj Road and threatened her at the point of knife to fulfil his desire. He placed his knife on her neck. She resisted and received injuried. Two persons came and then the accused ran away. Her statement finds support from the evidence of Nemichand and Udhistar, to %horn she narrated the story immediately ofter the occur-ranee. It is further supported by the evidence of Gheesa La1 and Kalyan, Police constable on horses to whom also she narrated the incident. Her injuries are proved by Dr. Fateh Singh Chaudhary, Medical Jurist Bhilawra. The testimony of Mst. Munni and these witnesses is reliable. By the evidence of these witnesses, the prosecution has succeeded in pi-wiring that the appellant caused injuries to Mst. Munni by a knife and used criminal force to her with intent to outrage her modesty. In this view of the matter, I upheld the conviction of the appellant for the offence under Section 354 and 324 IPC recorded by the learned Sessions Judge. I also do not find and ground for interfering with the sentences imposed on the appellant. 6. The appeal is, accordingly dismissed.Appeal dismissed. *******