SIKANDAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present appeal Sikandar @ Babu challenges the impugned judgment dated 11th May 2017, whereby he was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 354/451/506(I) IPC and the order on sentence dated 12th May 2017 directing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for the period of one year for the offence punishable under Section 354 IPC, rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default whereof to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month, for the offence punishable under Section 451 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for the period of one year for the offence punishable under Section 506 (I) IPC.

(2.) Assailing the conviction, learned counsel for the appellant contends that the appellant has been falsely implicated at the instance of father of the prosecutrix who was an alcoholic and used to fight with the father of the appellant. There are material contradictions and inconsistencies in the version of the prosecution witnesses. There are discrepancies qua the place of incident. The appellant has not been connected with the offence. No overt act has been attributed to him, hence is liable to be acquitted.

(3.) Per contra, learned APP for the State submits that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt the offence committed by the appellant based on the testimony of material witnesses, that is, the victim and the complainant, hence the appeal be dismissed.