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

2024 Supreme(Online)(SC) 2598

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
RAJASEKAR – Appellant
Versus
RAJASEKAR – Respondent
Crl.A. No.-000756-000756 / 2024



The court modified the sentence under the POCSO Act to the period already served, emphasizing justice and the Appellant's contributions to the victim's welfare.

Headnote:(A) Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Sections 3(a) and 4 - Conviction for sexual offences - The Appellant was convicted and sentenced to ten years RI and a fine of INR 5,000, confirmed by the High Court - The Appellant argued for leniency based on having served over seven years and providing for the victim and her child - The court modified the sentence to the period already undergone. (Paras 2, 6)

(B) Sentencing - The court emphasized that the ends of justice would be met by reducing the sentence to the time already served, considering the totality of circumstances. (Paras 5, 6)

Facts of the case:
The Appellant was convicted under the POCSO Act for offences against a minor and sentenced to ten years RI, which was upheld by the High Court. The Appellant has served more than seven years and supports the victim and her child.

Findings of Court:
The conviction was confirmed, but the sentence was modified to the period already served by the Appellant.

Issues: The main issue was whether the sentence should be modified based on the time already served and the Appellant's contributions to the victim's welfare.

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that reducing the sentence to the time already served would serve the ends of justice, taking into account the Appellant's circumstances and contributions.

Result: Appeal allowed in part.

ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. The Appellant before us is aggrieved by the judgement dated 26.10.2021 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Criminal Appeal No. 176 of 2017 whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal preferred by the Appellant and confirmed the judgement dated 03.02.2017, passed by the Sessions Court--convicting the Appellant for offences u/S. 3(a) r/w Sec. 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (‘POCSO’) Act, 2012.

3. At the outset, it must be noted that vide order dated 12.07.2022, this Court issued notice only on the quantum of Digitally signed by SONIA BHASIN Date: 2024.02.09 16:55:01 IST Reason:

    Signature Not Verified sentence awarded to the Appellant. Therefore, only that limited question is required to be considered by this Court.
    Vide the judgement of the Sessions Court, the Appellant was sentenced to undergo ten years RI along with a fine of INR 5,000 with a default clause to undergo SI for three months. The State Government was also directed to pay INR 1,00,000 to the victim as compensation under Rule 7(2) of the POCSO Rules,

2012. The sentence imposed by the Sessions Court was confirmed by the High Court without any modification.

5. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that at the time of conviction, the minimum sentence prescribed u/Sec. 4 of the POCSO Act was seven years and as on date, the Appellant has already served more than seven years of his sentence. It is also submitted that the Appellant is providing for the day-to-day expenses of the victim and her child and therefore, further imprisonment will impact not only his family but also the victim’s. On these grounds, Learned Counsel presses for leniency.

6. Having heard the Learned Counsel for the parties and considering the totality of the circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the ends of justice would be met if the period of imprisonment awarded against the Appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by him. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. The conviction of the Appellant u/s. u/S. 3(a) r/w Sec. 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012 is hereby confirmed. However, the sentence imposed by the Sessions Court and confirmed by the High Court is hereby modified and reduced to the period already undergone by the Appellant.

7. The Appellant be set at liberty forthwith in case he is not required in any other case.

8. With the aforesaid, the appeal stands disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

……………………………………J. (VIKRAM NATH) ……………………………………J. (SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA) NEW DELHI FEBRUARY 05, 2024

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