SURESH CHANDRA Vs. SATE OF UTTARAKHAND
LAWS(UTN)-2013-8-117
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on August 14,2013

SURESH CHANDRA Appellant
VERSUS
Sate of Uttarakhand Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) A first information report was lodged by informant Kunwar Singh against the accused-revisionist on 03.02.1998, in patti Dhopaddhar, Pratap Nagar, District Tehri Garhwal, in respect of offences punishable under Sections 354, 299 and 361 IPC. PW 4 Kunwar Singh wrote a complaint to patti patwari Dhopaddhar that he had been to another village for his personal piece of work. When he returned to his house on 02.02.1998, his daughter Km. Hansi (PW 1) informed him that she went school on 31.01.1998 also, as usual. When she went to her school, only one male teacher was present there. Two female teachers did not come to school on that day. All the students were busy in attending their classes in the field. At around 11:00 a.m., one of her teacher, namely, Suresh Chandra (accused-revisionist) called Km. Hansi in his office. Since it was a call from a teacher, therefore, Km. Hansi went to his office. Km. Hansi was studying in class V. The teacher closed the windows of the room. The teacher asked Km. Hansi to read a paper. When she was about to open the window, the teacher refrained her from doing so. He outraged her modesty. Km. Hansi screamed. The teacher threatened her not to disclose the incident to anybody, otherwise she would be killed. Km. Hansi came out of the room. She apprised Km. Rajni and Manjit Singh with the said incident. The teacher also threatened other students. PW 4 Kunwar Singh, on having told about the incident by PW 1 Hansi, disclosed the incident to the villagers, who counselled PW 4 to lodge the report.
(2.) After the investigation, charge-sheet for the offences punishable under Sections 354 and 506 IPC was submitted against the accused. When the trial began, charge for the offences punishable under Sections 354 and 506 IPC was framed against the accused (Suresh Chandra) to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
(3.) Pw 1 Km. Hansi (victim), PW 2 Km. Soni, PW 3 Rameshwar Prasad (patti patwari/I.O.) and PW 4 Kunwar Singh (informant) were examined on behalf of the prosecution. Incriminating evidence was put to the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in reply to which he said that he was falsely implicated in the case because he belonged to a member of Scheduled Caste community. No evidence was given in defence. After considering the evidence on record, learned Trial Court convicted the accused of the offence punishable under Section 354 IPC and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of which, he was directed to undergo three months simple imprisonment. Aggrieved against the judgment and order dated 25.08.2005, a criminal appeal was preferred before the Sessions Judge, Tehri Garhwal, who dismissed the same. Aggrieved against the impugned judgment and order dated 17th March, 2007, present Criminal Revision was preferred.;


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