Back
SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR
Dashrath Rautia, s/o Johan Rautia – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
ORDER :
The petitioner has challenged his conviction and sentence of RI for 2 years under section 354 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, 'IPC') passed in Sessions Trial Case No. 70 of 2009.
2. Criminal Appeal No. 58 of 2011 filed by the petitioner against the aforesaid order of his conviction and sentence has been dismissed by the judgment dated 22nd April 2015.
3. On an allegation that the petitioner entered the house of Feku Nayak in the night of 23rd December 2007 in drunken condition, caught his wife and tore her blouse and attempted to sexually assault her, a complaint case was filed by the victim lady. After inquiry under section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, CrPC), the learned Magistrate found a prima facie case made out under section 376/511 IPC and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions.
4. A charge was framed under section 376/511 IPC against the petitioner and the trial commenced in which the prosecution has examined four witnesses in support of the charge – complainant has examined herself as PW1.
5. The witnesses who were produced by the defence stated that Dashrath Rautia was assaulted by Feku Nayak, Yogender Nayak and one another near the hous
The importance of scrutinizing evidence from interested witnesses and exercising caution in reappreciating evidence during revisional jurisdiction.
The absence of independent witnesses does not negate the reliability of a victim's testimony, and minor discrepancies do not undermine the core of the case.
In cases of alleged offenses under Section 354 IPC, the prosecution must establish the charge beyond reasonable doubt, and testimonies of victims carry significant weight, with delays in lodging FIR ....
The court established that the intention to outrage a woman's modesty is crucial in determining guilt under Section 354 IPC.
The court clarified the distinction between attempted rape and assault, ruling that the appellant's actions constituted assault under IPC Section 354, not attempted rape under Section 376.
The court upheld the conviction under Section 354 IPC, concluding that the appellant's actions constituted an outrage of modesty, supported by the victim's testimony and corroborating evidence.
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
