PINTU DAKUA Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant, by filing this Appeal, has called in question the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 24/2/2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-Cum-Special Court under POCSO Act, Nayagarh in T.R. No.74 of 2017.

(2.) Learned counsel for the Appellant (accused), from the very beginning, instead of questioning the finding of guilt against the accused, as has been returned by the Trial Court, confined her submission only on the question of sentence. She submitted that taking into account the age of the Appellant (accused) and the rural background from which he hails, as he is now living on doing petty business and maintaining his family, since he has already faced the mental agony of the criminal trial for about seven years, the sentence of imprisonment, as has been awarded, stands too harsh. She, therefore, submitted that it is a fit case that at this distance of time, keeping in view all the relevant factors into account, the sentence be appropriately modified to imposition of fine as deemed just and proper.

(3.) Learned Additional Standing Counsel for the Respondent-State, while submitting that the offence for which the conviction has been recorded against the Appellant (accused) is punishable with imprisonment of either description extending to one year or with fine extending to Rs.1000.00 or with both, contended that the sentence of imposition for a period four (4) months, as has been awarded by the Trial Court commensurate the offence committed under that circumstance.