The court upheld the conviction based on adequate corroborative evidence and reasoning while modifying the sentence from imprisonment to a monetary penalty, emphasizing fair trial principles.

ORDER :

RAJESH RAI K., J.

This revision petition is directed against the judgment passed in Crl.A.No.189/2019 dated 10.06.2020 by the Court of Principal District and Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangaluru (hereinafter referred to as the ‘First Appellate Court’ for short), whereby the First Appellate Court has allowed the appeal filed by the appellant/State and set-aside the judgment of acquittal passed by the Court of JMFC (II Court), at Mangaluru (hereinafter referred to as the ‘trial Court’ for short) in C.C.No.2752/2016 dated 27.03.2019. Further, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the revision petitioner/accused for the offences punishable under Sections 354-A(1)(i), 323 and 504 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 354-A(1)(i) of IPC and imposed a fine of Rs.1,000/- for each offence punishable under Sections 323 and 504 of IPC. In default of payment of fine, the revision petitioner/accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month each offence.

2 . The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the trial Court.

3. The factual matrix of the prosecution case is as follows:

The complainant who was examined as PW.1 i.e., Dr.Vibha Raghuram was travelling in a Bus bearing Registration No.KA- 51-B-1230 from Bengaluru to Mangaluru in the intervening night of 17.04.2016 and 18.04.2016. During her journey, at about 01:30 a.m. in the night hours at Sakleshpura, she felt someone touched her with a bad intention and that on keen observation, she found the co-passenger sitting next to her committed such act. It is further alleged that, she informed the said incident to the co-passengers, driver and staff of the Bus, however, none of them were came to rescue her. It is also alleged that, she could not contact her parents over mobile phone due to non availability of network. As such, when a Bus reached a place called B.C. Road, she contacted her parents over mobile phone and informed them about the said incident. Accordingly, her father-PW.2 and her aunt-PW3 were waiting for her arrival at P.V.S. Junction, Mangaluru. Thereafter, her father and her aunt questioned the accused about his illegal act. At that time, the accused abused them in filthy language and also assaulted them by hand. As such, PW.1 lodged the complaint before the Mangaluru East Police Station at Kadri Hills on 18.04.2016 at about 08:30 a.m. as per Ex.P1. Based on the said complaint, PW.10-PSI of the said Police Station registered the FIR against the revision petitioner/accused for the offences punishable under Sections 323 , 354 and 504 of IPC as per Ex.P10. Subsequently, the said Police arrested the accused on 30.04.2016 and produced him before the jurisdictional Magistrate. However, he got released on interim bail on the same day and later, on 11.05.2014, he released on regular bail by the learned Magistrate. Further, PW.10 investigated the matter and recorded the statement of witnesses and after obtaining necessary documents from the concerned authority, laid the charge sheet against the revision petitioner/accused for the aforesaid offences.

4. In order to prove the charge before the trial Court, the prosecution in total examined 10 witnesses as PWs.1 to 10 and got marked 10 documents as Exs.P1 to P10. However, the revision petitioner/accused neither examined any witness on his behalf nor got marked any documents.

5. After assessment of oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court acquitted the accused for the charges leveled against him. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the State preferred an appeal before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangaluru (First A