Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA
Md. Zafre Imam @ Mangla, Son of Sri Qyum Shah – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA, J.
Heard Mr. Syed Arshad Alam, Mr. Kamran Fazal and Ms. Anjum Perveen learned counsels for the appellant, and Mr. S. N. Prasad, learned APP for the State.
2. The present appeal has been being filed under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Cr.P.C.’) challenging the judgment of conviction and order dated 16.01.2008 passed by Additional Districts and Sessions Judge, Fast Tract Court No. 4, Darbhanga in Sessions Trial No. 218 of 2003 arising out of Singhwara Police Station Case no. 18 of 2002 by which the appellant has been found guilty of the offence punishable under Sections 376 /511 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’ and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years.
3. The brief facts of the prosecution story as narrated by the informant, Nasir Shah is that on the night of 21.03.2002 at around 8 PM, his daughter aged 14 years, had gone out of the house to defecate. At that time the accused/appellant Md. Zafre Imam @ Mangala son of Kayum Shah of his village was coming in an inebriated state after drinking toddy and on seeing his minor daughter alone, he caught
The distinction between 'attempt' and 'preparation' in criminal law leads to the conclusion that actions lacking overt intent to complete the crime cannot sustain a conviction for attempted rape, but....
(1) There is a visible distinction between ‘preparation’ and ‘attempt’ to commit an offence and it all depends on statutory edict coupled with nature of evidence produced in a case.(2) What constitut....
Attempted rape under IPC Sections 376 and 511 established through credible victim testimony, despite lack of penetration.
Conviction under Section 354 of IPC upheld when testimonies of victim and witnesses were consistent and reliable, distinguishing preparation from an attempt in sexual offences.
Partial penetration is sufficient for a conviction of attempted rape, reaffirming the necessity of proven intent to commit the offence.
Insufficient evidence for conviction under IPC Section 376(1) necessitates conviction for attempted rape under Section 376/511 due to partial penetration.
The distinction between preparation and attempt in sexual offenses requires clear evidence of intent and action beyond mere preparation.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between preparation and attempt to commit rape, leading to the finding that the appellant's acts amounted to attempt to rape, not r....
The absence of penetration negates a rape conviction under IPC Section 376, affirming culpability for outrage of modesty under IPC Section 354 based on established intent and actions.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
