Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
S. Talapatra, J
Amar Suklabaidya – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the initial conviction was based on serious allegations of sexual assault requiring sufficient evidence. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. arguments center on evidentiary insufficiency regarding intent and force required for conviction under ipc and pocso act. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 19) |
| 3. final judgment concludes with a modified conviction reflecting the more appropriate offense of sexual harassment. (Para 20 , 21) |
1. 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 S.374(2) of the Cr.P.C. 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 S.354B of the IPC and S.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 S.8 of the POCSO Act, with default impriso
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
