ANILKUMAR CHAITARBHAI VASAVA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. P.K. Shukla, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Ms. D.S. Pandit, learned APP for the State.

(2.) THE present memo of the appeal is received through the jail authorities. THE appellant-convict, by way of the present appeal, has challenged the legality and validity of the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge [5th Fast Track Court], Mehsana, in Sessions Case No. 161 of 2003, where under the appellant-convict has been held guilty of the charge of offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of I.P.C. For the offence punishable under Section 363 of I.P.C., the appellant is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further punishment is imposed upon the appellant-convict of simple imprisonment for 3 months. For the offence punishable under Section 366 of I.P.C., the appellant-convict is sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of payment of fine, he has been sentenced to simple imprisonment of 6 months. For the offence punishable under Section 376 of I.P.C., the appellant-convict is sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of 7 years and to pay fine of Rs. 3000/- and in default of payment of fine, 1 year's simple imprisonment is imposed upon him. Of course, these sentences are ordered to run concurrently. It is further ordered by the learned trial Judge that in the event of recovery of amount of fine, the victim may be paid Rs. 3,000/-.

(3.) THE appeal is partly allowed. Judgment and order of conviction rendered in Sessions Case No. 161 of 2003 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, [5th Fast Track Court], Mehsana on 12.1.2004 for all the offences is hereby upheld. However, order of substantive sentence imposed by the learned trial Judge so far as the offence punishable under Section 376 of I.P.C. is concerned, it is modified and reduced to rigorous imprisonment for 4 years. Now the accused shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for 4 years for the offence punishable under Section 376 of I.P.C., instead of 7 years imposed for the said offence. So far as the substantive punishment imposed for the offence punishable under Section 366 of I.P.C., is concerned, it is reduced to 50%, that is, one and half years and so far as the substantive punishment for the offence punishable under Section 363 of I.P.C. is concerned, it is reduced to one and half years instead of 2 years. All these punishments shall run concurrently. Amount of fine imposed for all these three offences shall remain unaltered including the punishment imposed in default of payment of fine. Order and direction accordingly.