news details |
|
|
| HC dismisses appeal of convict in rape case, cancels bail | | | Early Times Reporter
Jammu | Nov 28
Justice Nirmal Singh of J&K High Court, Jammu Wing, in a criminal appeal filed by Roshan Din, who was convicted and sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment for committing rape with a minor girl, dismissed the appeal and confirmed sentence awarded by the Sessions Judge Reasi on October 4, 2002. The Court also cancelled the bail bond and surety bond of the appellant, who was on bail, and directed Trial Court to issue warrants of arrest against the accused/appellant to undergo remaining period of sentence.
According to the prosecution case, a minor girl aged 12-13 years was cutting grass in her field in the afternoon of July 23, 1994 and the accused pounced upon her and closed her mouth, dragged her to his house and committed rape upon her, she was medically examined by the doctor, the police registered a case and after completion of the investigation challan u/s 376 RPC (rape) was presented in the Court of law. The then Additional Sessions Judge Reasi, after hearing the prosecution and defence evidence and also the counsels of the parties, convicted the accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs 5000 u/s 376 RPC. The order was passed on October 4, 2002 which was challenged in the shape of appeal in the High Court. Court suspended the sentence and granted bail to the accused.
Justice Nirmal Singh, after hearing Adv PN Goja appearing for the appellant and Additional Advocate General Mr. SC Gupta appearing for the state, observed that Court given thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced by Adv PN Goja but find no substance in it. There is no dispute that the Court can impose a lesser sentence by giving adequate and special reason but in the case in hand, there is no such special reason on the basis of which the sentence less than seven years can be imposed. Prosecutrix and her mother have given the age of the prosecutrix as 12 to 13 years (at the time of occurrence). From the statement of the doctor it is crystal clear that the appellant/accused had sexually inter-coursed prosecutrix. Ground taken by the counsel for the appellant reducing the sentence awarded to the accused vide judgment October 4, 2002 as the appellant accused has been married and have children and in case sentence is not reduced then family of the appellant/accused will suffer, cannot be accepted.
Justice Singh while dismissing the appeal further observed that in case such plea of counsel for the petitioner is accepted it will encourage other persons to commit such heinous crime and have a bad effect on the society. Justice Singh after quoting a judgment of the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal filed against the judgment of the Sessions Judge Reasi and directed Trial Court to issue warrant of arrest against the appellant to undergo remaining period of sentence. JNF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
