STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Vs. AMIT BHATT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these three appeals arise out of the common judgment given by learned Sessions Judge, Pauri Garhwal in Sessions Trial No.39 of 2010 whereby the appellants in Criminal Appeal Nos.80 of 2013 and 86 of 2013 were charged under Sections 376(2)(g), 395, and 511 IPC and have finally been convicted under Sections 395 and 354 IPC and have been sentenced for three years' R.I. under Section 395 IPC and one year's simple imprisonment under Section 354 IPC, apart from the fine which has also been awarded to them.

(2.) The Government, in turn, has preferred an appeal against acquittal as well as enhancement of sentence under Section 377/378 CrPC, although in the memo of appeal only Section 377 has been stated, but from the prayer in the appeal, it is clear that it is being preferred under Section 373/378 of CrPC.

(3.) The prosecutrix in this case lodged an FIR at P.S. Kotdwar on 8.4.2010 at about 3:05 PM which says that yesterday i.e. on 7.4.2010 at about 4 PM, the complainant who is a young woman had gone on her scooty for a ride with her friend Nirmal Bisht towards Kanvashram in Kotdwar. While they were returning from "Kanvashram", and had reached "Sati Chowk Road", they were stopped by a group of five persons who snatched the mobile phone of the prosecutrix and the mobile phone of her friend and took away Rs.800/- which was in the pocket of Nirmal Bisht. Thereafter, she was assaulted and beaten up by these five persons. When she raised an alarm, she and her friend were dragged towards the nearby jungle where the accused tried to undress and molest her. She continued to raise alarm and as a result a few persons from the nearby village came to their rescue. On the intervention of villagers, the key of her Scooty, the money and the mobile phones were returned to them. Meanwhile, the five assailants threatened that in case the matter is reported to the police, the two shall be killed. It is next stated in the FIR that the prosecutrix requested the persons who had saved her, to accompany her to the police station to lodge the FIR but they declined as they did not want to be involved in such matters. The police lodged the FIR and registered the case as case crime no.645 of 2010 under Sections 376, 511, 323, 504, 506 and 395 IPC. The chargesheet was submitted against the accused under Sections 376, 511, 323, 504, 506 and 395 IPC. Meanwhile, the accused, who were five in number, were arrested from their residence the very next day of the lodging the FIR.