The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLA No.300 of 2024 In the matter of an Appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and from the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 23rd February, 2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sundargarh in S.T. Case No.90/09/120 of 2018-20-23 (e-registration No.120 of 2023). Sushil Dandsena ---- -versus- …. Appellant State of Odisha …. Respondent Appeared in this case by Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode): For Appellant -
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Achyutananda Pattanaik (Advocate) For Respondent - Mr.G.N. Rout, Additional Standing Counsel CORAM MR. JUSTICE D.DASH Date of Hearing : 24.04.2024 : Date of Judgment : 01.05.2024 D.Dash,J. The Appellant, by filing this Appeal, has called in question the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 23rd February, 2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sundargarh in Sessions Trial Case No.90/09/120 of 2018-20-23 (e-registration No.-120/2023) arising out of G.R. Case No.598 of 2018 corresponding Kinjirkela P.S. Case No.55 of 2018 pending on the CRLA No.300 of 2024 Page 1 of 6 file of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (S.D.J.M.), Sundargarh. By the impugned the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the Appellant (accused) has been convicted for commission of the offence under section 324 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘the IPC’) and he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years with the benefit of usual set up. 2. Prosecution case is that on 24.06.2018 when the victim was returning from Sundargarh to Kinjirkela in a Commander Jeep, the accused called her over phone go get down near Patkijore temple and it was around 2.00 p.m. when the victim (P.W.8) reached near the temple, the accused detained the Commander Jeep and forcibly took her towards the jungle and he attempted to commit rape on her. The victim when protested, the accused brought out of a knife and threatened her to kill if she would disclose the matter before anybody. It is further alleged that having said so, the accused assaulted the victim (P.W.8) by a knife causing multiple bleeding injuries on her chest and other parts of her body and she thereafter when lost her sense, the accused is said to have taken away her two mobile phone sets along with the ATM card and money purse. CRLA No.300 of 2024 Page 2 of 6 3. Written report to the above fact being lodged by the mother of the victim (P.W.2) with the Officer-in-Charge (OIC), Kinjirkela Police Station, the same being treated as F.I.R., case was registered and finally on completion of investigation, the Final Form was submitted placing the accused to face the trial for commission of offence under sections 341/ 323/ 326/ 307/ 379/ 376(2)(n) of the IPC. The case being finally committed, the trial ultimately came to be concluded in the Court of learned Sessions Judge. 4. The Trial Court, upon examination of the prosecution witnesses (P.W.1 to P.W.21) and on careful scrutiny of the documentary evidence let in by the prosecution and marked Exts.1 to 25 has found the prosecution to have failed to establish the charges for the offences punishable under sections 341/323/326/307/379/376(2)(n) of the IPC and accordingly, he has been acquitted of all those charges. The accused, however, has been convicted for commission of offence under section 324 of the IPC and he has been sentenced as afore-stated. 5. Learned counsel for the Appellant (accused), from the very beginning, instead of questioning the finding of guilt of the accused under section 324 of the IPC as has been held by the Trial Court submitted that keeping in view the age of the accused, i.e., CRLA No.300 of 2024 Page 3 of 6 about 29 years at the time of commission of the alleged offence as also the fact that the Appellant hails from rural background and lives on cultivation, in order to maintain himself and his family as he during the trial has remained in custody for five months and twenty days, at this distance of time for more than five and half years imposition of sentence of imprisonment for the period undergone with appropriate sentence of fine as deemed just and proper would serve the ends of justice and meet its end. 6. Learned Additional Standing Counsel for the Respondent- State, placing the deposition of the Doctor (P.W.21) submits that when the Trial Court has found the Appellant to be the author of four incised wounds; one lacerated and one punctured wound upon the victim, the quantum of sentence imposed is well in order. 7. Keeping in view the submissions made, I have carefully read the impugned judgment of conviction and have also extensively travelled through the depositions of the witnesses (P.Ws.1 to P.W.21). 8. The Appellant having faced the trial having been charged for commission of offence under sections 341/ 323/ 326/ 307/ 379/376(2)(n) of the IPC, finally he has only been convicted for commission of offence under section 324 of the IPC. The Trial CRLA No.300 of 2024 Page 4 of 6 Court has not accepted the evidence of the victim so far as the allegation relating to the commission of said offences of which the accused has been acquitted. The incident dates back to 24.06.2018 and in the meantime there has been lapse of five years and ten months. The accused then was aged about 29 years and he by now has undergone the mental agony of a criminal trial for all these periods. Although the prosecution has proved that the accused had assaulted the victim in causing several injuries, the nature of all those injuries have been found to be simple. The evidence against the Appellant for commission of offence under section 376(2)(n) and 379 of the I.P.C, has been held to be unsatisfactory. The Appellant (accused) has accordingly been acquitted of the charges. The Appellant (accused) hails from the rural background and as it appears, has been undergoing mental agony of a criminal trial right from the year 2018 till now. 9. Cumulatively viewing of all these aforesaid, this Court is of the view that the sentence of imprisonment of the period already undergone with payment of fine of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for committing the offence under section 324 of the IPC; at this distance of time, would serve the interest of justice and meet its ends. CRLA No.300 of 2024 Page 5 of 6 Accordingly, the Appellant’s conviction for the offence under sections 324 of the IPC being confirmed; he is sentenced to the period already undergone and pay fine of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five thousand) in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. It is further directed that in the event of realization of fine, the said sum be paid to the victim (P.W.8) 10. In the result, the Appeal is allowed in part with the modification as to the order of sentence dated 23rd February, 2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sundergarh in Sessions Trial Case No.90/09/120 of 2018-20-23 to the extent as indicated above. (D. Dash), Judge. Himansu Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: HIMANSU SEKHAR DASH Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 08-May-2024 19:42:56 CRLA No.300 of 2024 Page 6 of 6