STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. RAJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment rendered by a learned Single Judge of the Karnataka High Court reducing the custodial sentence of respondent to 3 1/2 years instead of seven years as was imposed by the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Gulbarga, in SC No. 61/1993, after convicting the respondent for an offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the IPC). The victim (PW1) was aged less than 12 years when she was sexually ravished by the respondent on 31.1.1993 at about 12.30 p.m.

(2.) On the basis of First Information Report (in short the FIR) lodged at the police station law was set into motion. On completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed and accused faced trial and he pleaded innocence. Prosecution placed reliance on the evidence of victim and the medical evidence. The trial court convicted the accused under Section 376, IPC. An appeal was preferred before the High Court. The same was disposed of by the High Court maintaining the conviction but sentence was reduced to 3 1/2 years, since the High Court felt that in view of certain special reasons the custodial sentence was to be reduced to 3 1/2 years.

(3.) In support of the appeal, learned counsel for the State submitted that in a heinous crime like rape the High Court was not justified in reducing the sentence by referring to certain circumstances which are not only irrelevant but also cannot constitute special reasons warranting reduction in sentence. Since the accused was not represented in this appeal in spite of service of notice, Mr. Ashok Bhan, appeared as Amicus Curiae at our request.