Crl. A. 19/202 vs The State Of Tripura
2022 Latest Caselaw 410 Tri

                                       Page 1




                       HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                             AGARTALA

                              Crl. A. 19/2020
      Sri Sanju Tanti
      Son of Late Sankar Tanti, resident of Ramjadu Para,
      P.S. Khowai, District - Khowai, Tripura.
                                                                ----Appellant
                   `               Versus

      The State of Tripura
                                                                ----Respondent

For the Appellant(s) : Mr. S.S. Datta, Advocate.

      For the Respondent(s)                :    Mr. R. Dutta, P.P.

      Date of hearing & delivery
      of Judgment & Order                  :    07.04.2022

      Whether fit for reporting    :       No

                                 BEFORE
                   HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH

                    JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)

This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of

conviction dated 15.05.2020, passed by learned Special Judge (POCSO),

Khowai, Tripura, in Case No. Special (POCSO) 07 of 2018 whereby and

whereunder the appellant has been found guilty for committing offence

punishable under Section 8 of the POCSO Act and sentenced him to

suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for 3(three) years for the said offence and Page 2

also found guilty under Section 448 of IPC and sentenced to suffer

Rigorous Imprisonment for 1(one) year for the said offence.

2. The facts of the case as projected by the Ld. trial Judge, are

as under:

"One Smt. Kiranmala Debbarma (mother of the victim) lodged this complaint against one Sanju Tanti, S/o Lt. Sankar Tanti of Ramjadu Para (Shepai hour), under Khowai PS, Khowai Tripura stating inter-alia that on 30.12.2017 at about 1800 hours the accused entered into the dwelling house of the complainant and molested the minor daughter of the complainant namely "X" (real name withheld) and tried to rape on her. On hearing the hue and cry of the victim the complainant appeared there and, thereafter, the accused fled away from there..."

3. After registration of the case, the allegations levelled in the

complaint had been investigated. During the course of investigation, the

investigating officer recorded the statements of the victim as well as

other witnesses. Being satisfied with the complicity of the accused

relating to the offence, he submitted charge-sheet against the accused.

4. After receipt of the charge-sheet, cognizance was taken and

thereafter charge was framed under Sections 448 and 354 of IPC and

Section 8 of the POCSO Act, 2012. The contents of the charges were

read over and explained to the accused, to which he pleaded not guilty

and claimed to be tried.

Page 3

5. Prosecution to establish the offence had adduced as many

as 8 (eight) witnesses.

6. On closure of the evidence, the accused was examined

under Section 313 Cr.P.C to which he denied all the incriminating

circumstances surfaced against him in the evidence on record.

Thereafter, having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties

and after perusal of the record, the learned Special Judge convicted and

sentenced the accused as aforestated.

7. Feeling aggrieved, and dissatisfied with the said order of

conviction and sentence, the accused has preferred the instant appeal

before this court.

8. Heard Mr. S.S. Datta, learned counsel appearing for the

appellant. Also heard Mr. R. Dutta, learned Public Prosecutor appearing

for the State-respondent.

9. After careful perusal of the record it is found that the

offence under Section 8 of the POCSO Act has not been established

beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecution witnesses including the victim

has not specifically stated anything that there was any intention of the

accused to molest her. However, though she stated that the accused had

touched her hand, in this situation, in my opinion, the ingredients of

Section 8 have not been fulfilled and conviction and sentence under Page 4

Section 8 of the POCSO Act stand quashed and set aside. However, it

has been proved that the accused had trespassed the house of the

complainant.

10. In my opinion, appropriate and proportionate sentence

should be imposed upon the accused-appellant. In exercise of the power

of this court, I modify the sentence herein. The conviction under Section

448 of IPC has not been interfered with and considering the nature of

offence that the accused-appellant had trespassed the house of the

complainant, I modify the sentence to the extent that the accused-

appellant shall pay a fine of Rs.10,000 (Rupees ten thousand) to the

victim/complainant, in default of which, the accused-appellant shall

suffer simple imprisonment for a period of six months.

11. With the aforesaid directions, the sentence as imposed by

learned Special Judge has been modified. It is further directed that the

fine money shall be deposited to the concerned court within a period of

six months and on realization of the said fine money, the learned court

shall pay the same to the victim/complainant.

The Appeal stands allowed in part.

Send down the LCRs.

JUDGE Rohit