RAJENDRA ALIAS RAJU Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant/accused has filed this revision under section 397/401 of the Cr.P.C, being aggrieved by the Judgment dated 30.09.2011 passed by the 8 th Addl. Sessions Judge (FTC) Rewa in Cr.A.No.181/11 whereby the judgment dated 12.5.2011 passed by the JMFC Rewa in Cri.Case No.1539/2010, convicting and sentencing the applicant under section 354 of the IPC for RI six months with fine of Rs.500/- has been affirmed.

(2.) The case of the prosecution in short is that the prosecutrix Chandrakali Rajak lodged a report dated 14.5.2010 at police station Sagra district Rewa contending that she along with her son Ashish was sleeping in her courtyard of the house, its door was open, at the same time the applicant entered in the house and with bad intention, after catching her hand touched her Sari, on which, she shouted consequently, her son awoke and tried to hold the applicant but he fled away from such place. The applicant was also followed by her son but he could not catch him. At the time of the incident, her husband had went to answer the call of nature. He also followed the applicant from the same field. On such report the offence of section 354 of the IPC was registered. After holding the investigation, the applicant was charge-sheeted for such offence. After framing the charge, on appreciation of the evidence the applicant was convicted and sentenced as stated above. On filing the appeal, the same was dismissed thereafter the applicant has come forward to this court with this revision.

(3.) The applicant's counsel without challenging the findings of the impugned judgment holding conviction against the applicant under the aforesaid sections made his limited submissions, firstly the applicant being first offender, did not have any criminal antecedents, be extended the benefit of the Probation of the Offenders Act and secondly and also in alternative, he prayed to reduce the jail sentence of the applicant up to the period for which he has suffered, as he is in custody since 30.9.2011 the date of the impugned judgment of the appellate court till today and suffered near about one and a half months, by enhancing the amount of fine under the discretion of the court and prayed for allowing this revision till this extent.