NAND KISHORE Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present revision petition has been filed by Nand Kishore (hereinafter described as "the petitioner") directed against the judgment and order of sentence passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Mohindergarh, dated April 17, 1986 and April 19, 1986 respectively and of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Narnaul, dated 25.4.1988. The learned trial Court had held the petitioner guilty of the offence punishable under Sections 354 and 451 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- for the offence punishable under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code. He was further directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- for the offence punishable under Section 451 of the Indian Penal Code. In default of payment of fine, he was to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month. The sentences were directed to run concurrently. The appeal had been dismissed.

(2.) THE relevant facts are that on 10.8.1983 complainant Smt. Kamla, a resident of village Dongra, had approached the police station alongwith her father-in- law and made a statement that she lived with her husband separately in a house in the village. On the night intervening 31st July and 1st August, 1983 the petitioner came to her house. He had wrapped some back cloth on his body. At that time, she was half asleep and was alone in the house. On hearing footsteps, she asked as to who was there. The petitioner caught hold of her hand. She raised an alarm. In the meantime, Phul Singh Lambardar and Hardayal came to the spot. The petitioner made good his escape. A meeting of the panchayat was called but the petitioner did not appear before the panchayat. It is on these broad facts that report was submitted against the petitioner under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(3.) IN the present case, the incident is stated to have taken place on the night intervening 31st July and 1st August, 1983. The report was lodged with the police on 10.8.1983. Admittedly, there is a delay but, indeed, in the peculiar facts, the petitioner cannot take advantage of the said delay. This is for the reason that the same has been explained. It is in evidence that firstly the matter was referred to the panchayat of the village. Keeping in view that the matter was before the panchayat, it was obviously thought appropriate not to make a report immediately to the police.