THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND CONVICTION DATED 26.05.2016 PASSED BY THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKKABALLAPUR(SITTING AT CHINTAMANI) IN CRL.A.NO.08/2015 AND CONSEQUENTLY TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE DATED 29.12.2014 PASSED BY THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., CHINTAMANI IN C.C.NO.242/2012 BY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

ORAL ORDER

Heard Sri.Kalyan R., learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Sri.K.Nageshwarappa, learned High Court Government Pleader for the State/respondent.

2. Accused in C.C.No.242/2012 who has suffered an order of conviction for the offence punishable under Section 354 of Indian Penal Code and ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine amount of Rs.5,000/- of which sum of Rs.4,000/- was ordered to be paid as compensation to the victim girl through her mother (P.W.2) is the revision petitioner.

3. Being aggrieved by the same, accused filed an appeal before the First Appellate Court in Crl.A.No.8/2015 which came to be dismissed by upholding the order of conviction and sentence.

4. Facts in the nutshell which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present revision petition are as under:

4.1. A complaint came to be lodged with Chintamani Rural Police Station alleging the commission of the offence punishable under Section 354 of Indian Penal Code by contending that on 23.09.2011 at about 3.30 p.m. in Singanahalli village, near Venkatappa’s Garden land, victim girl who is mentally unsound, being the daughter of P.W.2 was sitting on the pump house. Accused with an malafide intention, dragged her to a mango grove and near the bushes, tried to disrobe her and outraged her modesty and attempted to commit forcible sexual intercourse.

4.2. At that juncture, victim girl raised alarm and passersby came there and looking at them, accused ran away from the spot. In the process, ‘nighty’ worn by the victim girl was torn.

4.3. Based on the complaint, police registered a crime and investigated the matter and filed the charge sheet for the offence punishable under Section 354 of IPC.

5. Upon receipt of the charge sheet, presence of the accused was secured and charges were framed. Accused pleaded not guilty and therefore, trial was held.

6. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused, prosecution examined eight witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.8 and placed on record four documents which were exhibited and marked as Exs.P.1 to P.4 besides marking material objects which is torn nighty worn by the victim girl at the time of incident.

7. Among the prosecution witness, P.W.2 is the mother of the victim girl and other witnesses are the eye witnesses to the incident, Investigating Agency and mahazar witnesses.

8. On conclusion of recording of the evidence, accused statement as is contemplated under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded wherein accused has denied all the incriminatory circumstances and did not place his version about the incident.

9. Thereafter, learned Trial Magistrate heard the arguments of the parties in detail and then convicted the accused for the offence punishable under Section 354 of Indian Penal Code and imposed fine of Rs.5,000/- as compensation and simple imprisonment for a period of one year for the proved offence under Section 354 of Indian Penal Code.

10. Learned Trial Magistrate also ordered that out of the fine amount, sum of Rs.4,000/- was ordered to be paid as compensation to the victim girl through her mother P.W.2.

11. Being aggrieved by the same, accused filed an appeal before the First Appellate Court in Crl.A.No.8/2015.

12. Learned Judge in the First Appellate Court after securing the records, heard the arguments of the parties in detail and on re-appreciation of the materi