SALLAMUDDIN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present appeal, the Appellant impugns the judgment dated 24th July, 2012 convicting the Appellant for offence under Section 354 IPC and order on sentence dated 26th July, 2012 directing him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-.

(2.) Learned counsel for the Appellant contends that there are material improvements in the statement of PW3 the complainant. Her husband and uncle, who were material witnesses and could have corroborated the version of the Complainant, have not been examined. The FIR was registered belatedly. No statement of the prosecutrix was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The Appellant was never performing the work of sorcery. Though on the same evidence, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the Appellant for offence under Sections 376/506 IPC however, he has been convicted for offence under Section 354 IPC erroneously. The Appellant has been falsely implicated and thus he be acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 354 IPC.

(3.) Learned APP for the State on the other hand contends that on the basis of the statement of the prosecutrix PW3 the offence under Section 354 IPC is clearly made out. Despite cross-examining the Complainant at length, nothing has been elicited. Learned APP on instructions states that the State has not filed any appeal against the acquittal under Sections 376/506 IPC.