The court may grant probation under the Probation of the Offenders Act when mitigating factors exist, emphasizing reform over punishment in cases with established culpability.

JUDGMENT :

URMILA JOSHI PHALKE, J.

1. Heard.

2. The applicant is assailing the judgment dated 21.02.2018 in Regular Criminal Case No.45/2016 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Hinganghat, whereby the Applicant is convicted for the offences punishable under Section 354 of IPC and sentence to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 1 year and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default of payment of fine further suffer simple imprisonment for one month. He is further convicted for the offence punishable under Section 452 of IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 1 year and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000/- and in default of payment of fine simple imprisonment for one month. The said judgment and order of conviction was challenged by the present Applicant before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hinganghat, District Wardha and the Learned Sessions Judge has modified the order of sentence and acquitted the present Applicant of the offence punishable under Sections 354 and 452 of IPC and convicted for the offence punishable under Section 352 of IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 1 month and to pay fine of Rs. 300/- in default of payment of fine to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 days. He is further convicted for the offence punishable under Section 451 of IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 1 year and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- in default of payment of fine suffer rigorous imprisonment for 15 days.

3. The brief facts of the case which are necessary for the disposal of the Revision as under:

3(i). It is alleged that, on 25.12.2015 prior to one month of the incident the Informant was residing with her family at Dnyaneshwar Ward, Hinganghat in the house of Vitthal Patil. At that time, the Applicant who is her cousin brother-in-law used to come to her house. At that time he quarreled with her husband for 2 to 3 times on a domestic reasons. When her husband was out of the house, at that time also the Applicant used to come to her house and was having ill intention about her and thereafter she started residing with her family at the house of Vijay Shende on rent.

3(ii). On 24.12.2015 at about 10:30 p.m., when her husband had gone to attend his duty at Mohata Mill, at that time see and her two sons were sleeping in their home. At about 11.00 p.m., somebody knocked the door, and therefore, she woke up and the said person pushed the door so the door was broken and she witnessed the Applicant. Suddenly, the Applicant entered in the house and there were exchange of words between them. At the relevant time, the Applicant outraged her modesty and thereafter fled away from the spot of incident.

3(iii). On the basis of the said report, Police have registered the crime bearing No.344/2015. After completion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer has filed charge-sheet against the present Applicant. To prove the charge against the present Applicant had examined PW-1/Victim at Exh.5, PW-2 son of the Informant at Exh. 10, PW-3/Nilima Vijay Shende wife of landlord at Exh.12, PW-4/Vijay Zibal Shende who is the landlord at Exh-13 and PW-5/Investigating Officer at Exh.16. The prosecution also places reliance on the report at Exh.6, the FIR at Exh.7, Spot Panchnama at Exh.14, arrest panchanama at Exh.16 and on the basis of said evidence the Magistrate observed that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt against the present Applicant and thereby convicted as above stated. The said judgment and order of sentence was challenged by the present Applicant before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hinganghat, wherein the Appeal was partly allowed and the Applicant was convicted of the offence punishable under Section 352 and 451