Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 264 (UTT)

Ajay Prashad @ Ajay Kumar v. State of Uttarakhand

2021-05-10

R.C.KHULBE

body2021
JUDGMENT : The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 14.12.2020 passed by the FTC/Addl. Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO), Haldwani, Nainital in S.S.T. No.42 of 2018, State vs. Ajay Prashad, whereby the learned Trial Court convicted the appellant u/s 363 IPC and sentenced him to undergo three years’ R.I. with fine of Rs.10,000; he was also convicted u/s 366 IPC and sentenced him to undergo five years’ R.I. with fine of Rs.20,000/-; in default of payment of fine, one month’s additional S.I. was awarded. All the aforesaid sentences shall run concurrently. 2. In short, case of the prosecution is that an information Ex. Ka-2 was given with the Police Station, Lalkuan on 30.04.2018 about the kidnapping of the daughter of the informant. On the basis of said information, an FIR Ex.Ka-6 was lodged with the police station; the accused was arrested on 30.04.2018. Accordingly, arresting memo Ex.Ka-7 was prepared. After investigation, charge-sheet (Ex.Ka-13) was submitted. Accordingly, after compliance of provision of Section 207 Cr.P.C., the case was committed to the court of sessions. The Sessions Judge took the cognizance and accordingly charges were framed on 26.11.2018. The appellant denied all the allegations and claimed to be tried. 3. To bring home the guilt of the appellant, the prosecution produced PW1 prosecutrix , PW2 father of the prosecutrix, PW3 uncle of the prosecutrix, PW4 aunty of the prosecutrix, PW5 Prema Bohra, Assistant Teacher, PW6 S.I. Naresh Pant, PW7 A.S.I. Neeraj Singhal, PW8 Constable Boby Singh, PW9 Cont. Satrughan Kumar, PW10 Dr. Alpna Mishra and PW11 S.I. Maya Bisht. 4. After completion of prosecution evidence, statement of appellant was recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C. he stated that he did not commit any crime; and there is no evidence against him; he was arrested by the police illegally. 5. Upon consideration of the oral and documentary evidence, by order dated 14.12.2020, the trial court convicted the appellant for the offences punishable u/s 363 and 366 IPC, and sentenced him as mentioned in paragraph no.1 of the judgment. 6. Feeling aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentence, the present appeal is preferred before this Court. 7. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned counsel for the State. 8. 6. Feeling aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentence, the present appeal is preferred before this Court. 7. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned counsel for the State. 8. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that he does not want to challenge the conviction of the appellant, as the same is based on merits and there is no illegality therein. He confined his prayer to the extent that since the matter relates to the year 2018, hence the Court may kindly consider it appropriate to reduce the sentence awarded to the appellant, as the appellant has already served more than 19 months in jail. 9. The learned counsel for the State also submits that the sentence awarded by the trial court u/s 363 and 366 IPC in which there is no minimum sentence prescribed by the law and there is no evidence on record about any criminal antecedent. 10. I have also gone through the evidence on record and come to this conclusion that the trial court has convicted the appellant based on proper evidence, there is no infirmity in the impugned findings. The appellant does not have any criminal antecedent in his past life, he is not required in any other criminal case except the one in question; the appellant did not commit an sexual offence. Looking to the gravity of the offence, it is considered to be just and proper to alter the sentence to the appellant from 3 years’ R.I. to the extent of 2 years’ R.I. under Section 363 IPC and from 5 years’ R.I. to the extent of 2 years’ R.I. under Section 366 IPC. 11. In view of the foregoing discussion, the appeal is allowed in part. The appellant is sentenced as follows: - A. The appellant is sentenced to undergo two years’ R.I. u/s 363 IPC instead of three years’ R.I. as awarded by the court below. B. The appellant is sentenced to undergo two years’ R.I. u/s 366 IPC instead of five years’ R.I. as awarded by the court below C. The fine awarded under each section is also maintained, and he shall deposit the fine as imposed by the trial court. D. All the sentences shall run concurrently. B. The appellant is sentenced to undergo two years’ R.I. u/s 366 IPC instead of five years’ R.I. as awarded by the court below C. The fine awarded under each section is also maintained, and he shall deposit the fine as imposed by the trial court. D. All the sentences shall run concurrently. E. On completion of period of sentence as modified by this Court, he shall be released from jail as per law and after due verification of records. 12. Let a copy of this judgment alongwith records be sent to the court concerned for compliance.