Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(i) Under Section 323 IPC, one year rigorous imprisonment with Rs.1000/- fine.

(ii) Under Section 504 IPC, two years rigorous imprisonment with Rs.10,000/- fine.

(iii) Under Section 21(2) of the POCSO Act rigorous imprisonment for one year with Rs.10,000/- fine.

FACTS

3. The prosecution case briefly stated is as follows:-

4. On 10.07.2018, charge under Sections 354A, 376(2), 504 IPC and Sections 5 r/w 6 of the POCSO Act and Section 67-A of the I.T. Act were framed against the appellant Mukesh Kumar Sahgal.

5. Charges under Sections 323, 504 IPC and Section 21(2) of the POCSO Act were framed against the appellant Daya Shelakoti. Both the appellants denied the charge and claimed trial.

6. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined 11 witnesses, namely, PW1, the victim, PW2 uncle of the victim, PW3 mother of the victim, PW4 aunt of the victim, PW5 Constable Laxman Singh, PW6 Dr. Hema Rawat, PW7 Constable Vinod Maurya, PW8 Constable Virendra Bisht, PW9 Amit Kumar, PW10 Bhupal Ram Pori, PW11 Inspector Narayan Singh.

93. The appellant Daya Shelakoti has also been convicted and sentenced under Section 323, 504 IPC. In so far as Section 323, 504 IPC is concerned, we are of the view that the prosecution has not been able to prove charge under Section 504 IPC. Therefore, appellant Daya Shelakoti deserves to be acquitted of the charge under Section 504 IPC.

94. In so far as the charge under Section 323 IPC is concerned, we are of the view that the prosecution has been able to prove the charge under Section 323 IPC against the appellant Daya Shelakoti.

(v) The conviction and sentence of the appellant Daya Shelakoti under Section 504 IPC is set aside. The appellant Daya Shelakoti is acquitted of the charge under Section 504 IPC

(vi) The other directions with regard to payment of compensation to the victim shall remain unaltered.

(vii) The impugned judgment and order dated 16.10.2018 is modified to the extent as indicated above.