Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: 354D in Manish Maurya Alias @ John Peter vs The State on 30 November, 2024Matching Fragments
4. The said FIR was lodged under sections 354D/506/509 IPC. After investigation the charge-sheet was filed before the court on 04.08.2016. The accused was summoned to face the trial, after the Ld. Magistrate took cognizance.
5. Charges were framed against the accused for offence under sections 354D/506/509 IPC to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial on 08.06.2017.
6. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined 8 witnesses of which complainant M is PW1, her Aunt Rajeshwari is PW4 and her cousin brother Sidharth Gautam is PW7.
As regards sentencing, Ld. Counsel submitted that the sentence of simple imprisonment for a period of 2 years for offence u/s.354D IPC is excessive as there is no previous involvement of the accused and he is a young new wed man, who has a future, which will be destroyed, if he is sentenced to prison for 2 years.
Criminal Appeal No.131/2024 Page 6 of 25Manish Maurya @ John Peter Vs The State (NCT of DELHI)
13. Ld. Addl. PP on the other hand submitted that the accused has been rightly convicted for the offence u/s.354D / 506 IPC for the detailed reasons mentioned by the Ld. Magistrate in paras no.9 to 46 of the impugned judgment.
Relevant legal provisions :
15. To decide the present case, it is important to discuss the provisions i.e., Section 354D/506/509 IPC.
16. As the accused was acquitted for offence u/s.509 IPC by the Ld. Trial Court and no appeal in that regard has been filed, therefore, the ingredients of Section 509 IPC are not required to be mentioned here.
17. The accused has been convicted for the offence u/s.354D Manish Maurya @ John Peter Vs The State (NCT of DELHI) IPC i.e. stalking and necessary ingredients to make out the said offence as per Section 354D IPC are as under :
31. In opinion of the Court, the Ld. Trial Court has rightly analysed the evidence available on record, so as to reach the conclusion that the prosecution proved the case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt for offences u/s.354D/506 IPC.
Findings on sentence (i.e. whether the sentence awarded is excessive)
32. The accused has been sentenced to simple imprisonment for two years for offence u/s.354D IPC and for one year for offence u/s.506 IPC.