Sikkim High Court
Lalit Subba vs State Of Sikkim on 12 August, 2024
Author: Meenakshi Madan Rai
Bench: Meenakshi Madan Rai
THE HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM : GANGTOK
(Criminal Appeal Jurisdiction)
Dated : 12th August, 2024
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SINGLE BENCH : THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI, JUDGE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crl.A. No.33 of 2023
Appellant : Lalit Subba
versus
Respondent : State of Sikkim
Appeal under Section 374(2) of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appearance
Mr. Sunil Baraily with Leada T. Bhutia, Advocates for the Appellant.
Mr. Yadev Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State-
Respondent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ORDER ON SENTENCE
Meenakshi Madan Rai, J.
1. Heard Learned Counsel for the parties on sentence.
2. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that
presently the Appellant is thirty-two years of age, he has no
criminal antecedents and has been the only bread winner in his
family. That apart, his wife who is working in a salon, earns a
paltry income with which she is unable to maintain herself and her
daughter, who is five year old and is suffering from mental health
issues, including seizures. That, the child is under medical
treatment, for which frequent outstation visits are required and an
extended period of incarceration for the Appellant would in fact
adversely affect the Appellant's innocent minor child. Hence, only
the minimum sentence prescribed be imposed on the Appellant.
3. Per contra, Learned Additional Public Prosecutor
submits that in view of the gravity of the offence and the fact that
the victim was barely six year old when the Appellant perpetrated
the heinous offence on her, the maximum period of imprisonment
prescribed for the offences, i.e., Section 9(l) and Section 9(m),
both punishable under Section 10 of the Protection of Children from
Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter, the "POCSO Act"), to be
imposed on him, i.e., seven years, each. That, fine of ₹ 5,000/-
(Rupees five thousand) only, each, also be imposed under each of
the offences, with a default clause as deemed appropriate.
4. Having given due consideration to the submissions
advanced, in view of the nature and gravity of the offences and as
correctly pointed out by Learned Additional Public Prosecutor that,
it was perpetrated on a minor of about six years of age, while the
Appellant was a married adult at the relevant time, I am of the
considered view that the following sentences will meet the ends of
justice;
(i) The Appellant is accordingly sentenced to undergo
simple imprisonment for five years, each, under each of the
offences, i.e., Section 9(l) and Section 9(m), both punishable under
Section 10 of the POCSO Act and to pay a fine of ₹ 5,000/-
(Rupees five thousand) only, each, under each of the offences. In
default of payment of fine, he shall undergo further simple
imprisonment of one month each, under each of the offences. The
sentences of imprisonment shall run concurrently.
(ii) The period of imprisonment already undergone by the
Appellant during investigation, as under-trial prisoner and on
conviction by the Court of the Learned Special Judge (POCSO Act),
Mangan District, Sikkim, vide the impugned Judgment and Order
on Sentence, be set off against the period of imprisonment
imposed on him today.
5. Appeal disposed of accordingly.
Lalit Subba vs. State of Sikkim 3
6. Copy of this Order be forwarded to the Learned Trial
Court for information along with its records.
7. A copy of this Order also be made over to the
Appellant/Convict through the Jail Superintendent, Central Prison,
Rongyek and to the Jail Authority at the Central Prison, Rongyek,
for information and appropriate steps.
( Meenakshi Madan Rai )
Judge
12-08-2024
Approved for reporting : Yes
ds/sdl
