MANISH @ MANIRAM DHIMAR Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed against the judgment dated 16.06.2004 passed by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Mahasamund in Criminal Appeal No. 338 of 2003, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge has confirmed the judgment dated 31.10.2003 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mahasamund in Criminal Case No. 732 of 2001 convicting the applicant for the offences punishable under Sections 457 and 354 of IPC and sentencing him to undergo six months' rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.200/- and three months' rigorous imprisonment respectively, with default stipulation. The applicant has already paid the fine amount imposed upon him in the trial Court itself.

(2.) The prosecution case in brief is that on 16.11.2001 in the night at 9.30 pm complainant- Sangeeta, along with her husband and children was sleeping inside their house casually leaving the doors open and went into deep slumber. At that moment, present applicant with bad intention came inside the house covertly and tried to molest her. She woke up freakishly and caught the applicant. Meanwhile, her husband also caught hold of the applicant, but anyhow, he managed to fled by giving a jolt to him. On hearing the screaming, Saroj, neighbour of the complainant came there and saw the applicant. Immediately after the incident, the complainant reported the matter in the Police Station Mahasamund. On completion of the investigation, the Police filed a charge sheet against the applicant before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mahasamund. After framing of charge and recording of evidence, the offences were found proved and the applicant was convicted and sentenced as stated herein above. An appeal was preferred by the applicant against that judgment, which was dismissed and the judgment of the trial Court was affirmed. Hence, this revision petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is not challenging his conviction. He further submits that he confines his argument to the sentence part only and prays to reduce the jail sentence awarded to the applicant to the period already undergone by him as he has been facing the case against him since 2001. He was in jail for nearly two months and has been granted bail by this Court on 29.07.2004. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedent. Since the applicant has already served nearly two months' jail sentence, the same be reduced to the period already undergone by him.