RANCHI, India, May 15 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on April 13:

1. Heard Mr. Vinay Kumar Tiwary, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP.

2. Instant criminal revision has been preferred against the judgment of conviction dated 20.12.2014 passed in Cr. Appeal. No. 102 of 2012 by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-IV, Palamau whereby and whereunder learned Appellate Court has dismissed the appeal preferred against the order of conviction dated 03.08.2012 passed by the Railway Judicial Magistrate, Palamau at Daltonganj in G.R. Case No. 1512 of 2008, T.R. No. 17 of 2012 whereby and whereunder the learned Railway Judicial Magistrate convicted the petitioner under Section 354 of the IPC and sentenced him to R.I. for six months.

3. The factual matrix giving rise to this revision is that on 05.09.2008 at 09:30 pm, the informant was travelling on Inter City Express and when she was going to bathroom to discharge her natural call, one person namely Bablu Pandey approached there and caught her waist. On alarm, her associates Dipanjali Tirky and Manoj Kumar Sahu came and caught Bablu Pandey. The Accused person was drunk. The informant alleged that the accused was trying to take her inside the bathroom with intention to outrage her modesty.

4. On the written complaint by the informant, Rail P.S. Daltonganj Case No. 19/2008 was registered under Section 341 & 354 of the IPC. On investigation, charge sheet was submitted against the accused Bablu Pandey for the offence under Section 354 of the IPC. Accordingly, cognizance was taken. The substance of accusation against the accused Bablu Pandey was explained to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5. After conclusion of trial, impugned judgement was passed, which has been assailed in this revision.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner without touching the merits of the judgment of conviction passed by the learned trial Court and upheld by the learned Appellate Court has confined himself towards the quantum of sentence awarded to him. It is further submitted that the occurrence took place while the present petitioner and the victim lady (informant) were travelling in a train. It is alleged that while the informant girl was going to toilet, meanwhile, from behind, the present petitioner caught waist of her and she immediately raised alarm. Then, her associates caught hold of the present petitioner and handed over to the police. It is further submitted that the petitioner was convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 354 of the IPC and out of six months rigorous imprisonment awarded to the petitioner, he has already undergone substantial part of imprisonment i.e. about 3 months. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances, the petitioner has already been punished sufficiently. Accordingly, his sentence may be altered from R.I. of six months to the period of imprisonment already undergone.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=oVz058q2ZLjDVEITM0Vw1IPgYew0cR9PPSq5%2FfPMb6HPBesOwJ4QvHsDmvxgiiPT&caseno=Cr.Rev./38/2015&cCode=1&cino=JHHC010178122015&state_code=7&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.