BALAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA
LAWS(KER)-2003-10-5
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Decided on October 07,2003

BALAN Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF KERALA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) Appellants are accused in Sessions Case 88/1996 on the file of the Sessions Court, Kasaragod and the order of conviction and sentence in the above case is under challenge. The allegation against the appellants was that they committed the offences under Secs. 354 and 341 Indian Penal Code and Sec. 3(1) (xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. After trial, on an appreciation of the evidence the trial court found that the first appellant committed the offence under Sec. 3(1) (xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") and Sec. 354 of the Indian Penal Code and the second appellant committed the offence under Sec. 341 of the Indian Penal Code. On convicting the appellants for the above offences the trial court proceeded on to sentence the first appellant under Sec. 3(1) (xi) of the act to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months. No separate sentence was awarded under Sec. 354 of the Indian Penal Code in view of the sentence awarded under Sec. 3(1) (xi) of the Act. The second appellant was sentenced under Sec. 341 of the Indian Penal Code to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one week. Aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentence the appellants have come up in appeal.
(2.) Occurrence is alleged to have taken place at 3.30 p.m. on 8-4-1996 and the allegation is that P.W. 1 was travelling in Yamuna bus for going to Thimiri where her sister was residing. She had to get down at Cheruvathur bus stop for handing over ration card of her sister in a ration shop there. It is stated that at about 3.30 p.m. she occupied a seat which was indented for ladies and the appellants were sitting in the seat behind the seat which was occupied by P.W. 1. The case is that the first appellant, who was sitting just behind P.W. 1, wrote something with a pen on the lateral side of her body towards her breast. P.W. 1 protested by standing up and then she saw that was done by the first appellant who was sitting behind the seat. There is also allegation that when P.W. 1 tried to get out of the bus when it reached Cheruvathur the first appellan/caught hold of her on the left shoulder at the point where her sari was pinned to her blouse and made an attempt to beat her and also abused her. She escaped from the clutches of the first appellant and went to a telephone booth to give information to police over telephone. The allegation is that the second appellant went to the booth and obstructed her from entering into the booth by keeping his hand across in front of her. She could not make a telephone call to police station and she went to the police station in an autorickshaw.
(3.) Ext.P-1 first information was given to P.W. 4, Head Constable in Chandera Police Station. On the basis of Ext.P-1 first information Crime 91/1996 was registered on preparing Ext.P-1 (a) first information report alleging commission of offence under Sec. 354 of the Indian Penal Code. P.W. 2, the doctor examined P.W. 1 and issued Ext.P-3 wound certificate. P.W. 10, the Assistant Sub Inspector of Police took up the investigation of the crime and prepared Ext.P-9 mahazar of the place of occurrence. On 20-4-1996 he sent a report to Court stating that during investigation it was revealed that the offence punishable under Sec. 3(1) (xi) of the Act was also committed. P.W. 11, the Circle Inspector of Police, Neeleswaram took up the investigation of the crime. On completing the investigation of the crime, final report was filed in Court.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.