RAJU @ RAJ KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present appeal, Raju @ Raj Kumar challenges the impugned judgment dated 27th May, 2017 convicting him for the offences punishable under Section 354/509/325/174A IPC in FIR No. 219/2013 registered at PS Badarpur and the order on sentence dated 7th June, 2017 directing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default thereof to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months for the offence punishable under Section 354 IPC, rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default thereof to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of four months for the offence punishable under Section 325 IPC, simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default thereof to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence punishable under Section 509 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- and in default thereof to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months for the offence punishable under Section 174A IPC.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case because the prosecutrix was having illicit relations with his tauji to which the appellant used to object and also because prosecutrix wanted to grab the share of the appellant in the property.

(3.) Per contra, Learned APP for the State submits that the appellant has been rightly convicted by the Learned Trial Court on the basis of the testimony of the prosecutrix which is duly corroborated by her MLC.