ORDER:

This Criminal Appeal is filed by the State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, under Section 377(2)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1972 (for short, „the Cr.P.C‟), with a prayer to interfere with the quantum of sentence that was imposed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Madanapalle, Chittoor District (for short, „the trial Court‟) in Sessions Case No.284 of 2006, dated 17.07.2008, contending that the quantum of sentence that was imposed against the respondents (accused) is not in accordance with the procedure.

2. The parties to this Appeal will hereinafter be referred to as described before the trial Court, for the sake of convenience. So, the respondents herein are the accused in the aforesaid Sessions Case No.284 of 2006, who faced trial for the charges under Sections 448 and 354 R/w.34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, „the IPC‟) pertaining to Crime No.39 of 2006 of Molakalacheruvu Police Station, Chittoor District.

3. Brief case of the prosecution, as narrated before the trial Court, as per the charge sheet averments, is as follows:

The Sub-Inspector of Police, Molakalacheruvu Police Station, filed the charge sheet against the accused alleging the offences under Sections 448 and 354 R/w.34 of the IPC. On 07.07.2006 at 10:00 A.M. the accused trespassed into the hut of one Vimalamma, caught hold of her, torn her saree and jacket with an intention to outrage her modesty. On hearing her cries, the accused fled away. On her report, a case in Crime No.39 of 2006 was registered. During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer arrested the accused and sent them for remand and, after completion of investigation, he filed charge sheet.

4. The learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Thamballapalle, took the case on file under Sections 448 and 354 IPC and, after completing the formalities under Section 207 Cr.P.C., made over the case to the Court of Sessions, Chittoor District in accordance with Section 209 Cr.P.C. and the Court of Sessions, Chittoor Division, in turn numbered it as Sessions Case No.284 of 2006 and made over to the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Madanapalle, for disposal, in accordance with law.

5. On appearance of the accused before the trial Court, Charges under Sections 448 and 354 IPC were framed and explained to them in Telugu, for which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. The prosecution, during the course of trial, got examined PWs.1 to 5 and marked Exs.P-1 to P-4 and MOs.1 and 2.

7. The accused were subjected to 313 Cr.P.C examination to explain the incriminating material, after closure of the evidence of the defence under Section 313 Cr.P.C. They denied the incriminating circumstances and got marked Exs.D-1 to D-8.

8. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge, on hearing both sides and after considering the oral and documentary evidence, found the accused guilty of the charges under Sections 448 and 354 R/w.34 IPC and, after questioning them about the quantum of sentence, sentenced them to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 6 months for the offence under Section 448 IPC and Rigorous Imprisonment for 5 years and also to pay a fine of Rs.200/- each in default to suffer Simple Imprisonment for one month each under Section 354 R/w.34 IPC.

9. As against the above said judgment of the trial Court, the State Government filed the present Appeal stating that the sentence that was imposed against the respondents herein (accused) is not in accordance with the procedure.

10. Now, the simple question that falls for consideration is, whether the sentence imposed against the respondents (accused) in Sessions Case No.284 of 2006 by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Madanapalle by virtue of the judgment, dated 17.07.2008, is liable to be interfered with?

11. POINT: Needless to point out here that, as this Court is deciding only about the quantum of sentence imposed against the respondents, the scope of the Appeal is very limited