Telangana High Court
Bhushanavena Balaraju , Balu vs The State Of Telangana on 6 November, 2023
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.88 of 2022
JUDGMENT:
This Criminal Appeal is filed by the Appellant/Accused aggrieved by the conviction recorded by the IV Additional Sessions Judge (FTC)-cum-Special Judge for POCSO Act Cases, Karimnagar, in Sessions Case No.104 of 2018, dt.11.02.2022, convicting the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 354-D of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing the accused to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and also a fine of Rs.1,000/-.
2. Heard.
3. The case of the victim-PW1 is that while she was studying Intermediate II year, the accused followed her on the pretext of love on 13.12.2017 at about 5.30 P.M., while she was in Peddapalli Bus Stand to go to Peddakalvala village, the appellant went there and harassed her on the pretext of love and threatened her. It was witnessed by two other witnesses and on seeing that the appellant fled. Six days thereafter on 19.12.2017, a complaint was lodged before the Police which was marked as Ex.P1 in the trial Court.
2
4. On the basis of the said complaint, the Police filed charge sheet for the offences under Section 354-D of the Indian Penal Code and Section 11 r/w.12 of the POCSO Act, 2012.
5. The learned Sessions Judge on the basis of the evidence adduced during trial, recorded conviction for the offence under Section 354-D of the Indian Penal Code.
6. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that false complaint was filed on account of disputes in between the families. Further, there is no proof that the appellant was a minor when the incident had occurred. The allegation does not attract any of the ingredients of Section 354-D of the Indian Penal Code.
7. On the other hand learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the evidence disclosed that the appellant followed the victim on the pretext of love and it amounts to harassment. It squarely falls within the definition of Section 354-D of the Indian Penal Code.
3
8. Section 354-D of the Indian Penal Code reads as follows;
"354D. Stalking.--(1) Any man who--
i) follows a woman and contacts, or attempts to contact such woman to foster personal interaction repeatedly despite a clear indication of disinterest by such woman;"
9. The requirement under Section 354-D is that a person should have followed and contacted a woman to foster personal interaction 'repeatedly'.
10. In the present case, solitary incident is narrated by the victim-PW1. There is nothing in the evidence of PW1 to indicate that the said act of following or expressing love was on more than one occasion. Solitary instance cannot be an act committed repeatedly as required under Section 354-D of the Indian Penal Code. In the said circumstances, none of the ingredients of Section 354-D of the Indian Penal Code are made out.
11. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal stands allowed and the conviction recorded by the IV Additional Sessions Judge (FTC)- cum-Special Judge for POCSO Act Cases, Karimnagar, in Sessions Case No.104 of 2018, dt.11.02.2022, against the 4 appellant, is hereby set aside. The appellant is on bail and his bail bonds shall stand discharged.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
_________________ K.SURENDER, J Date: 06.11.2023 tk