Page No.# 1/4 vs State Of Assam
2025 Latest Caselaw 7734 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Page No.# 1/4 vs State Of Assam on 13 October, 2025

                                                                                     Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010122372014




                                                                             2025:GAU-AS:13773

                               THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
     (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                                    Case No. : Crl.A./28/2014

             TANKESWAR BARUAH
             S/O SRI PADA BARUA, R/O NASONIGAON, P.S. TINGKHONG, DIST.
             DIBRUGARH, ASSAM.



             VERSUS

             STATE OF ASSAM




Advocate for the Petitioner    : MR.B CHETIA, MR.U J SAIKIA

Advocate for the Respondent : , PP, ASSAM




                                             BEFORE
                    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR
                                            ORDER

13/10/2025

Heard Mr. U J Saikia, learned counsel for the appellant and Ms. A Begum, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the State respondent.

2. The present appeal has been instituted by the appellant assailing the judgment dated 22.11.2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dibrugarh, in Sessions Case No. Page No.# 2/4

110/2018, convicting the appellant, herein, under Section 417 IPC and sentencing him to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for 1 (one) year along with fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand), in default, to undergo further imprisonment for 3 (three) months.

3. The prosecution case in brief is that on 09.03.2008, one Sri Bipul Neog, as informant, had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge, Naharkatia Police Station to the effect that his daughter was in love with the accused appellant, herein, and the appellant with false promise of marriage, had sexual relationship with his daughter and had impregnated her and she was carrying 7 (seven) months of pregnancy as on that day.

It was further alleged that the appellant, herein, had denied the responsibility of the child in the womb of his daughter and had refused to accept the victim girl and the child.

On receipt of the said FIR, police registered Naharkatia P.S. Case No. 29/2008 under Section 376 IPC. On conclusion of the investigation, police laid charge-sheet against the appellant, herein, under Section 376 IPC.

On the case being committed to the Court of Sessions Judge, Dibrugarh, a charge under Section 376 IPC was framed against the appellant, herein and the same being read over and explained to him, he having pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried, a trial ensued.

During the trial, the prosecution examined 8 witnesses. The appellant, herein, was thereafter examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

The learned Trial Court upon conclusion of the trial, on appreciating the evidences coming on record was pleased vide judgment dated 22.11.2013 to convict the appellant, herein, under Section 417 IPC. On his such conviction, the appellant, herein, was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 1 (one) year along with fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand), in default, to suffer further imprisonment for 3 (three) months.

Being aggrieved, the appellant, herein, has instituted the present proceeding.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the materials available on record.

5. As noticed, hereinabove, the appellant, herein, was charge of an offence under Section 376 IPC. The learned Trial Court, on appreciating the evidences coming on record, was pleased to Page No.# 3/4

conclude that the offence under Section 376 IPC, alleged against the appellant, herein, was not established.

6. This Court has perused the conclusions drawn by the learned Trial Court towards acquitting the appellant, herein, from the offence under Section 376 IPC and finds that the same was so based on the evidences coming on record and no infirmity with regard to the same is found. Accordingly, the acquittal of the appellant, herein, under Section 376 IPC is upheld.

7. The learned Trial Court after having acquitted the appellant, herein, from the offence under Section 376 IPC, basing on the materials available on record found that the appellant, herein, had performed sexual intercourse with the victim girl with the promise of marriage. However, the appellant, herein, did not keep his promise and thereby, deceived the victim. Accordingly, basing on the evidences coming on record, the learned Trial Court proceeded to hold the appellant, herein, guilty of the offence punishable under Section 417 IPC.

8. This Court on a close perusal of the evidences coming on record, more particularly, the deposition as made by the victim girl, finds that the appellant, herein, is guilty of the offence punishable under Section 417 IPC and accordingly, the conclusions drawn in this connection by the learned Trial Court would not mandate any interference.

9. Having drawn the above conclusions, this Court notices that the offence was committed by the appellant, herein, in the month of March, 2008. The learned Trial Court while proceeding to sentence the appellant, herein, had noticed the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. However, considering the gravity of the offence, the benefit there under was not extended to the appellant, herein. This Court also notices that the child born to the victim girl was adopted during the trial and marriage of the victim girl was also solemnized.

10. Considering the long lapse of time occasioned since the date of commission of the offence by the appellant, herein and also noticing that the appellant, herein, was not proceeded against for an offence of similar nature either prior to commission of the offence involved in the present proceeding and during the pendency of the proceedings against him and also noticing the fact that the appellant, herein, has been litigating the matter initially before the learned Trial Court and thereafter, in the present appeal before this Court, this Court is of the considered view that the appellant, herein, is entitled to be granted the benefit under the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. The said benefit being permissible to be granted by this Court in exercise of its Appellate jurisdiction, this Page No.# 4/4

Court extends the benefit under the Act of 1958 to the appellant, herein.

11. Accordingly, for the reasons recorded, hereinabove, the appellant, herein, is given the benefit under the Act of 1958 and the sentences modified to the effect that instead of sending the appellant to jail, he should be given the benefit under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.

12. This Court has only modified the sentencing with regard to imprisonment of the appellant, herein, and the fine as imposed by the learned Trial Court not having been interfered with, the appellant, herein, would be liable to deposit the fine amount.

13. In view of the above discussion, it is directed that the appellant, herein, will file two sureties to the tune of Rs.15,000/- each, along with a personal bond before the learned Sessions Judge, Dibrugarh and undertake to the effect that the appellant, herein, shall maintain peace and good behaviour during the period of 1 (one) year from the date of filing of the bond. The aforesaid bond be filed by the appellant within a period of 1 (one) month from the date of this order along with the deposit of the fine amount as imposed by the learned Trial Court vide judgment dated 22.11.2013.

14. With the above observations and directions, the present appeal stands disposed of.

15. Send down the records of the case to the learned Trial Court along with a copy of this order for information and necessary action.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant