RAJESH KUMAR,J. - (1.)Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned counsel for the State.
(2.)The present revision application has been filed against the judgment dtd. 10/7/2020, passed by the court of learned District and Additional Sessions Judge - II, Bokaro in Criminal Appeal No.88 of 2019, whereby the judgment dtd. 12/4/2019, passed by the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bermo at Tenughat in Bermo P.S. Case No.36 of 2015, corresponding to G.R. Case No.258 of 2015 (Tr. No.125 of 2019), has been modified and the petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Sec. 354(C) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay the fine of Rs.5,000.00 and in default thereof, to further undergo S.I for three months.
(3.)The prosecution story is that the revisionist has tried to take photographs of the victim while she was defecating in a toilet having no roof. The F.I.R has been lodged by the police being Bermo P.S. Case No.36 of 2015 and after completing the investigation the police filed the charge-sheet under Ss. 294, 354 and 354(C) of the Indian Penal Code and the revisionist has been put to trial. In order to substantiate the prosecution story, altogether five witnesses have been examined by the prosecution. P.W - 1 is the uncle of the victim, P.W.-2 is the father of the victim, P.W.-3 is the mother of the victim, P.W.-4 is the victim herself and P.W. -5 is the brother of the victim. P.Ws.-1, 2, 3 and 5 are the hearsay witnesses and they have deposed on the basis of narration made by P.W.-4, i.e., the victim herself. P.W.-4 has stated that when she had gone to toilet, having no roof, for defecating at about 11:00 P.M., in the night, she saw that the revisionist is trying to capture her photographs through his mobile and on raising alarm by her, the revisionist has escaped. After completion of the trial, revisionist has been acquitted from the charges under Ss. 294 and 354 of the I.P.C, but has been convicted under Sec. 354(C) of the I.P.C and has been punished simple imprisonment for two years along with fine, which has been reduced by the appellate court to the minimum period of one year along with fine upholding the conviction under Sec. 354(C) of the I.P.C.