Amar Suklabaidya VS State of Tripura

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

S.TALAPATRA
Amar Suklabaidya – Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :S. Lodh, Advocate
For the Respondent: A. Roy Barman, Addl. PP.

JUDGMENT :

S. Talapatra, J.

Heard Mr. S. Lodh, learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as Mr. B. Choudhury, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the state.

2. This is an appeal under section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C., 1973 from the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 24.03.2017 delivered in Special (POCSO) 32 of 2015 by the Special Judge, North Tripura, Dharmanagar.

3. By the said judgment, the appellant has been convicted under Section 354B of the IPC and section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, 'POCSO Act'). Pursuant thereto, the appellant has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 3(three) years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000 (rupees ten thousand) for commission of offence punishable under Section 8 of the POCSO Act, with default imprisonment for 6(six) months. It has been directed that on realization of fine, the money should be paid to the victim as compensation and the said money be managed in a fixed deposit till she attained the majority. No separate sentence has been given for commission of offence punishable under Section 354B of the IPC.

4. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that from the c