SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Tri) 49

HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA
S.G. Chattopadhyay, J.
Ratan Bhowmik - Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura - Respondent
Crl. Rev. P. No. 43 of 2020
Decided On : 06-04-2022

Advocates appeared:
Mr. S. Sarkar, Sr. Adv, Ms. Shima Banik Deb, Ms. P. Chakraborty, Advocates, for the Petitioner; Mr. S. Debnath, Addl. P.P, for the Respondent

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.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, Section 354 - The appellant was convicted under Section 354 IPC for outraging the modesty of a woman after entering her kitchen and making an indecent proposal, which she resisted. The Sessions Judge upheld the conviction despite the appellant's claim of false accusation due to a prior dispute. (Paras 1, 10, 22, 28)

(B) Evidence - The court emphasized the weight of the victim's testimony corroborated by eyewitnesses and physical evidence, confirming that the appellant committed the act with the intention to outrage the victim's modesty. (Paras 10, 22, 26)

Facts of the case:
The appellant entered the victim's house while she was alone, made inappropriate advances, and physically assaulted her. The incident was witnessed by neighbors, leading to the arrest of the appellant following the victim's complaint. (Paras 2, 6)

Findings of Court:
The court confirmed the conviction under Section 354 IPC based on consistent testimonies, stating the appellant’s claim of false accusation lacked evidence. The sentence of one year RI and a fine of Rs. 5,000 was affirmed. (Paras 9, 28)

Issues: The central issues included the credibility of the victim's account against the backdrop of the appellant's claims of personal vendetta and evidentiary support from witnesses. (Paras 12, 29)

Ratio Decidendi: The court held the victim's testimony, corroborated by eyewitness accounts, sufficiently established the appellant’s guilt under Section 354 IPC, effectively rejecting the defense's narrative of a false case due to a personal dispute. (Paras 10, 28)

Result: The petition stands dismissed, and the appellant is directed to surrender to serve the sentence. (Para 30)

Table of Content
1. factual background of the case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
2. court's analysis of evidence and conviction. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 21)
3. arguments regarding the credibility of the victim's testimony. (Para 12 , 13 , 14)
4. essence of section 354 ipc and its interpretation. (Para 24 , 25)
5. conclusion and directive for surrender. (Para 28 , 29 , 30)

JUDGMENT

1. This criminal revision arises from the judgment and order dated 23.11.2020 passed by the Sessions Judge, South Tripura, Belonia in Criminal Appeal No.12 of 2020 affirming the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 12.02.2020 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, South Tripura, Belonia in case No. PRC (WP) 15 of 2018 whereby the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate convicted the petitioner for having committed offence punishable under section 354 IPC and sentenced him to RI for one year and fine of Rs.5,000/- with default stipulation.

2. Factual background of the case is as under:

Victim lodged a written FIR with the officer in charge of Hrishyamukh police outpost at Belonia on 25.12.2017 at around 4 O'clock in the afternoon alleging that at 12.30 noon on the day when she was in the kitchen of her house, accused made an entry into her kitchen in absence of her husband and sons at home. He gave an indecent proposal to her and also offered her money. Suddenly, he embraced her and tried to disrobe her. He also touched her breasts. To free herself from the hold of the accused, victim took up a dao (a sharp cutting weapon) and caught hold of his shirt. They started scuffling with each other and came to the courtyard. Her younger son who was having a bath in the nearby tubewell came to the rescue of his mother. People who were engaged in work in the nearby paddy field also rushed to the house of the victim and detained the accused. After a while, wife of the accused and 12-15 relatives of the accused came to there and they forcibly took away the accused from there. While leaving, they threatened the victim with dire consequences.

3. The officer in charge of Hrishyamukh police outpost recorded the information in the General Diary of the police outpost vide HRM O/P GDE No.13 dated 25.12.2017 and forwarded the FIR to the officer in charge of Belonia Women police station for registration of case. Based on the FIR of the victim, Belonia Women police station case No.2017 WMN 057 under sections 448,354 and 506 IPC was registered and the case was endorsed to Women Sub Inspector of police Rubi Bala Baidya for investigation.

4. In the course of investigation, the investigating officer had visited the crime scene on the following day and seized the slippers of the accused and a piece of his shirt which got ripped during his scuffling with the victim from the courtyard of the victims' house. She had also drawn up a hand sketch map of the crime scene along with separate index indicating therein the material locations of the crime scene. Thereafter, the investigating officer examined the victim and other witnesses acquainted with the facts of the case and recorded their police statements under section 161 Cr.P.C. Victim was also produced before the Judicial Magistrate who recorded her statement under section 164(5) Cr.P.C.

5. Having concluded the investigation, the investigating officer laid charge sheet against the accused for having committed offence punishable under sections 448, 354 and 506 IPC. Names of as many as ten charge witnesses including the victim and the investigating officer were listed in the charge sheet. The Judicial Magistrate, First Class received the charge sheet and took cognizance of the offence punishable under sections 448, 354 and 506 IPC. Thereafter, trial commenced in the court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class with the framing of the following charges against the accused:

'Firstly:- That, you the above named accused person on 25.12.17 around 12.30 hours committed criminal trespass by entering into the house of the informant with

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top