Telangana High Court
Gajula Veeranna vs The State Of Telangana on 14 December, 2023
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.133 of 2021
JUDGMENT:
This appeal is filed by the accused aggrieved by the
conviction recorded by the Special Judge for Fast tracking of
Cases relating to Atrocities against Women-cum-IX Additional
Sessions Judge, Warangal, in Sessions Case No.154 of 2019
dated 02.03.2021 for the offence under Section 354 of the Indian
Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo Rigorous
Imprisonment for a period of one year and a fine of Rs.3,000/-.
2. Heard.
3. Briefly, the case of the prosecution is that when PW1 was
watering the cotton field in their village at about 2.00 p.m., the
appellant went there, caught hold of her hand and tried to rape
her. At that point of time, she was alone in the field and shouted
for help. Her husband-PW2 rushed to the said place and on
seeing him, the accused fled. Accordingly, complaint was filed.
4. The complaint was investigated and charge sheet was filed
under sections 354 and 376 r/w.511 of Indian Penal Code.
5. The learned Sessions Judge having examined PWs.1 to 9
and marking Exs.P1 to P8 found that the offence under Section
376 r/w.511 of IPC was not made out. However, the accused is
convicted for the offence under Section 354 of the Indian Penal
Code.
6. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant would submit
that a false case is filed against the appellant with a delay of
nearly 24 hours. It is highly improbable that no villagers were
present in day time i.e. around 2.00 p.m. The question of PW1-
victim being alone at that time does not arise. In fact there is a
road adjoining the fields, which is busy. For the said reasons,
since the allegations are highly improbable, the appeal has to be
allowed.
7. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
submits that the victim-PW1 has clearly stated that the
appellant went to the fields and tried to commit rape for which
reason, the appeal has to be dismissed.
8. PW1-victim stated that the appellant went to the fields and
caught hold of her hand. Apart from the said allegations of
catching hold of her hand, the victim-PW1 had not stated as to
what transpired or what happened after the appellant had
caught hold of her hand. Further, it is not stated by PW1 as to
what was done by the appellant after holding her hand and what
she meant by 'trying to rape her'. No other acts of the appellant
are stated, except for catching hold of the hand. From the
evidence it can be inferred that either the gestures or the
approach of the appellant, the victim had an apprehension that
the appellant had caught hold of her hand to rape her.
9. To attract an offence under Section 354 of the Indian Penal
Code, using criminal force or assault intending to outrage the
modesty, are the ingredients. Forcibly catching hold of the hand
or making any kind of gestures which the victim had sensed that
it was done to outrage her modesty, would suffice to attract
Section 354.
10. However, keeping in view that apart from catching hold of
the hand, the appellant had not done any other acts as narrated
by PW1-victim, this Court deems it appropriate to convict the
appellant/accused for the offence under Section 509 of the
Indian Penal Code.
11. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is partly allowed and the
conviction under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code is hereby
set aside and the appellant is convicted for the offence under
Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to pay
additional fine of Rs.20,000/-. If the appellant/accused fails to
pay the fine of Rs.20,000/- within one (1) month from the date of
this order, he shall undergo three (3) months Simple
Imprisonment.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand
closed.
_________________
K.SURENDER, J
Date: 14.12.2023
tk
