ORDER 1. HEARD THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES. 2. LEAVE GRANTED. 3. THE RESPONDENTS WERE CONVICTED IN A SESSIONS TRIAL FOR OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 376/109 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 (FOR SHORT "IPC") AND SENTENCED TO UNDERGO RIGOROUS IMPRISONMENT FOR SEVEN YEARS, BESIDES FINE IN TERMS OF THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF THE COURT OF SESSION. IN APPEAL (CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 571 OF 1987), THE HIGH COURT, WITHOUT ANY DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER, HAS SET ASIDE THE CONVICTION FOR OFFENCE OF RAPE AND HAS, INSTEAD, CONVICTED _HE RESPONDENTS FOR OUTRAGING THE MODESTY OF A WOMAN UNDER SECTION 354 IPC AND HAS REDUCED THE SENTENCE TO THE PERIOD ALREADY UNDERGONE BY THEM, BESIDES FINE OF RUPEES FIVE THOUSAND. NOTHING HAS BEEN STATED IN THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT ABOUT THE REASONS AND EXAMINATION OF THE EVIDENCE BY THE COURT OF SESSION. UNFORTUNATELY, VARIOUS ORDERS OF THIS NATURE HAVE COME TO THE NOTICE OF THIS COURT AND AT THIS STAGE, WE SAY NO MORE SINCE WE PROPOSE TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND REMAND THE CRIMINAL APPEAL FOR FRESH DISPOSAL BY THE HIGH COURT. 4. FOR THE AFORESAID REASONS, THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT OF THE HIGH COURT IS SET ASIDE AND CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 571 OF 1987 IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE HIGH COURT FOR EXPEDITIOUS DISPOSAL AFRESH. 5. WE REQUEST THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT TO PLACE THE CRIMINAL APPEAL BEFORE A JUDGE OTHER THAN THE ONE WHO PASSED THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT. 6. THE CRIMINAL APPEAL IS, ACCORDINGLY, ALLOWED.