Rajesh H. Shukla, J. - (1.) The present appeal under sec. 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the impugned judgment and order rendered in Sessions Case No. 28 of 2001 by the Addl. Sessions Judge, 4th Fast Track Court, Porbandar, dated 27.7.2004 recording the conviction of the appellant original accused for the offence under sec. 354 of IPC and sentencing him to R.I. for 2 years and fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default S.I. for 1 month. He was also convicted for the offence under sec. 452 of IPC and sentenced him to R.I. for 3 years and fine of Rs. 10,000/-, i/d S.I. for 6 months. Out of the amount of fine, the victim is also ordered to be compensated.
(2.) The facts of the case, briefly summarized, are as follows: "2.1 As it transpires from the record, the daughter of the complainant, aged about 9 years, was at home on 15.1.2001 when the parents had gone out for labour work. At that time, the accused who was residing nearby is said to have entered the house of the complainant when the victim was alone and made an attempt to commit the offence of rape and tried to outrage the modesty of the girl. He is also said to have threatened the victim. Therefore, when the victim raised shouts the grandfather came and the accused ran away and she conveyed to the mother about the incident culminating into the FIR being C.R. No. 2-0/2001 registered with Madhavpur Police Station, Dist. Porbandar, for the alleged offences under sections 376, 511, 506(2), 354 and 452 of IPC. 2.2. After the investigation was over, the charge-sheet was filed before the Court of Magistrate and it was committed to the Court of Sessions as the offences are triable by the court of sessions. 2.3 In order to bring home the charges levelled against the appellant accused, the prosecution examined the witnesses including the complainant, victim, mother and other witnesses. 2.4 The accused has also testified and led the evidence in the defence. 2.5 After recording of the evidence of the prosecution witnesses was over, the statement of the accused under sec. 313 of CrPC was recorded and the evidence of the defence was also recorded. 2.6 After hearing the learned APP as well as the learned advocate for the accused, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, as stated above, recorded acquittal for the offence under sec. 376 of IPC and recorded conviction for the offences under sec. 354 and 452 of IPC. 2.7 It is this judgment and order which has been assailed in the present appeal on the grounds stated in the memo of appeal."
(3.) Heard learned advocate Ms. Sadahna Sagar for the appellant-original accused and learned APP Shri HL Jani for the State.;