Bombay High Court High Court

Tukaram Govind Yadav vs State Of Maharashtra on 30 November, 2010

Bombay High Court
Tukaram Govind Yadav vs State Of Maharashtra on 30 November, 2010
Bench: A.P. Bhangale
                                           1
                                                  APEAL-506-96&29-97


              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION




                                                                              
                      CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.506 OF 1996




                                                      
    Tukaram Govind Yadav,                        ]
    Age : 19 years, Occ.Agriculturist,           ]
    r/o Sonarwadi, Tal. Bhudargad,               ]




                                                     
    District Kolhapur.                           ] ..Appellant.
          Versus
    State of Maharashtra.                        ] ..Respondent.




                                         
                                 ......
                           igALONG WITH
             CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.29 OF 1997

    Smt.Parvati Shankar Yadav,                   ]
                         
    Age : 60 years, Occ.Household,               ]
    R/o. Sonarwadi, Tal. Bhudargad,              ]
    Dist. Kolhapur.                              ] ..Appellant.
          Versus
      


    1.    Shri Tukaram Govind Yadav,             ]
   



          Age about 19 years,                    ]
          R/o. Sonarwadi, Tal. Bhudargad,        ]
          Dist. Kolhapur.                        ]
    2.    The State of Maharashtra.              ] ..Respondent.





                                        .........
    Smt.Varsha Palav, Advocate for the appellant in Criminal Appeal No.
    506 of 1996.





    Mr.K.K. Jadhav, Advocate for the applicant in Criminal Revision No.29 
    of 1997.
    Mr.S.V.   Sadavarte,   Advocate   for   Respondent   No.1   in   Cri.Rev.Appln. 
    No.29 of 1997.
    Mr.K.V. Saste, A.P.P. for the State.
                                        .........
     




                                                      ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:39:41 :::
                                            2
                                                   APEAL-506-96&29-97


                       CORAM   :  A. P. BHANGALE,  J.
                       DATE       :  30.11.2010.




                                                      
    ORAL JUDGMENT :

1. Both these appeal and revision are preferred challenging the

judgment and order dated 6.7.1996 passed by the learned Additional

Sessions Judge, Kolhapur in Sessions Case No.49 of 1996 whereby the

learned trial Judge convicted the accused for the offence punishable

under Section 376 read with Section 511 of Indian Penal Code and

directed the accused to suffer S.I. for one year and fine of Rs.300/- in

default S.I. for one month. By the said order, considering the age of

the accused, he was directed to be released under Section 360 of

Cr.P.C. on giving a bond of good behaviour of one year in the sum of

Rs.5000/- with a surety in the like amount.

2. While the appellant in Criminal Appeal No.506 of 1996

challenges his conviction under Section 376 read with Section 511 of

Indian Penal Code, the revision petitioner in Criminal Revision

Application No.29 of 1997 contended that the sentence imposed was

inadequate considering the nature of offence held as proved by the

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 16:39:41 :::
3
APEAL-506-96&29-97

learned trial Judge.

3. Briefly stated the case of the prosecution is that : first

informant Parvatibai Yadav and the accused are resident of village

Sonarwadi and used to reside in that village when the incident

occurred. The first informant was residing with her daughter-in-law,

grand-daughter and her two sons. Victim Ujwala is the grand-

daughter of first informant who was aged about nine years at the

time of the incident. It is case of the prosecution that on 27.10.1995

while Ujwala was playing with her sister Jyoti and her friend Rani in

the afternoon in front of the house of the accused. At about 3:00

p.m. Jyoti had returned to the house complaining that their play was

disturbed by the accused who had driven away Jyoti and Rani and

taken away Ujwala in his house. The first informant immediately

went to the house of the accused. According to her, she had found

accused and her grand-daughter Ujwala in the kitchen while nicker of

Ujwala was removed and she was lying on the ground. Accused was

found sleeping over her trying to have intercourse with her. When

first informant reached, the accused had got up. Thereafter the victim

was taken away by the first informant back to her house. In the

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 16:39:41 :::
4
APEAL-506-96&29-97

evening time, a complaint was lodged with the police.

4. The investigation followed. Accused was chargesheeted.

Considering the nature of accusation, the case was committed to the

Court of Session and the charge was framed to which the accused

pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5. Prosecution had examined three witnesses to prove its case

against the accused. The alleged victim Ujwala was examined as

PW-1. According to Ujwala, the accused caused her to sleep on the

ground facing to sky and then he removed her nicker and slept on

her. She received some pains in her private part and when she started

crying, accused pressed her mouth with the hand. He had got up after

he saw her grand-mother coming in the house of the accused. The

victim was cross-examined regarding the incident. She denied that

her mother and grand-mother tutored her to give the statement

against the accused. Although, she stated that she had received pains

in her vagina when the accused slept over her, she admitted that

word ‘vagina’ was not appearing in the statement before the police.

6. PW-2 Parvati Yadav (first informant) deposed about the

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 16:39:41 :::
5
APEAL-506-96&29-97

incident that Jyoti came to house weeping and said her that she was

beaten by the accused. When Parvati went to the house of the

accused, she found Ujwala sleeping on the floor and accused was

lying over her. She then took her grand-daughter to her house along

with the nicker of her grand-daughter which according to her was

removed by the accused. In the course of examination-in-chief of

PW-2 nothing appears as to whether the accused was doing anything

which may legally constitute an attempt to commit rape. According to

the learned Advocate for the appellant, it may be at the most a stage

of preparation and not an attempt. Learned Advocate for the

appellant contended that the alleged victim Ujwala was medically

examined on the same day of the incident at about 9:45 p.m.. The

certificate which appeared at Exh.16, as admitted by the defence

counsel, clearly mentions that there were no marks of violence. No

signs of bleeding. Her hymen was found intact. Pubic hair was

absent. Under these circumstances, it is contended that there was no

attempt to commit rape and, therefore, the appellant is entitled for an

order of acquittal. The learned Advocate for the appellant further

contended that the prosecution has also failed to examine mother of

the victim girl.

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 16:39:41 :::
6

APEAL-506-96&29-97

7. As against this submission, the learned A.P.P. submitted that

the act committed by the appellant to remove the nicker of the victim

and to lie over her was serious act and can be considered as

constituting an attempt to sexually ravish a minor girl aged nine

years.

8. I have also heard the learned Advocate for revision petitioner

in support of Criminal Revision Application No.29 of 1997. Learned

Advocate for the revision petitioner contended that the sentence

imposed against the appellant was inadequate considering the nature

of offence as proved. It is submitted that benefit of Section 360 of

Cr.P.C. ought not to have been granted in favour of the accused.

According to the learned Advocate for the revision petitioner, the

impugned order needs to be modified so as to impose legal and

proper sentence upon the accused for the offence punishable under

Section 376 read with Section 511 of I.P.C.

9. Considered the submissions at bar and considered the nature

of evidence led before the trial Court. Looking to the evidence led in

this case, it is necessary to find out as to whether the alleged act of

the accused clearly constituted an attempt to commit rape or it was

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 16:39:41 :::
7
APEAL-506-96&29-97

merely indecent sexual assault which may be punishable under

Section 354 of I.P.C.

10. In the ruling of State of Maharashtra Vs. Mohd. Yakub and

Ors. reported in AIR 1980 S.C. 1111, the Apex Court considered the

definition of `attempt to commit crime’ as the last proximate act

which a person does towards the commission of an offence, the

consummation of the offence being hindered by circumstances

beyond his control. It was observed by the Apex Court that what

constitutes an “attempt” is a mixed question of law and fact,

depending largely on the circumstances of the particular case.

“Attempt” defies a precise and exact definition. Broadly speaking, all

crimes which consist of the commission of affirmative acts are

preceded by some covert or overt conduct which may be divided into

three stages. The first stage exists when the culprit first entertains the

idea or intention to commit an offence. In the second stage, he makes

preparations to commit it. The third stage is reached when the culprit

takes deliberate overt steps to commit the offence. Such overt act or

step in order to be `criminal’ need not be the penultimate act

towards the commission of the offence. It is sufficient if such act or

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 16:39:41 :::
8
APEAL-506-96&29-97

acts were deliberately done, and manifest a clear intention to commit

the offence aimed, being reasonably proximate to the consummation

of the offence.

11. There is a distinction between `preparation’ and `attempt’.

Attempt begins where preparation ends. A person commits the

offence of attempt to commit a particular offence when accused (i)

intends to commit a particular offence, (ii) he having made

preparation and with the intention to commit an offence, (iii) does an

act towards its commission, such an act need not be the penultimate

act towards the commission of that offence but must be an act during

the course of committing that offence.

12. In para-31 of the Mohd. Yakub’s case (supra), the Apex Court

observed thus :

“31. …… In order to constitute `an attempt’ first,
there must be an intention to commit a particular

offence, second, some act must have been done
which would necessarily have to be done towards
the commission of the offence, and, third, such act
must be proximate’ to the intended result. The
measure of proximity is not in relation to time and

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 16:39:41 :::
9
APEAL-506-96&29-97

action but in relation to intention. In other words,
the act must reveal, with reasonable certainty, in

conjunction with other facts and circumstances and

not necessarily in isolation an intention, as
distinguished from a mere desire or object, to
commit the particular offence, though the act by

itself may be merely suggestive or indicative of such
intention, but that it must be, that is, it must be

indicative or suggestive of the intention. ……….”

13.

In a case of rape, rape is committed when male organ

penetrates, at least partial, the female organ. In between complete

rape and attempt to commit rape there is a rear area covered by

Section 354 of I.P.C. i.e. assault or criminal force to woman with

intent to outrage her modesty or indecent assault. The dividing line

between attempt to commit rape and indecent assault is not only thin

but also is practically invisible. For an offence of attempt to commit

rape, prosecution is required to establish that the act of the accused

went beyond the stage of preparation. In a given case, where the

prosecutrix was made naked and her cries attracted her uncle who

came to the spot and then the accused fled away, it was held that it

was not a case of attempt to commit rape but was one under Section

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 16:39:41 :::
10
APEAL-506-96&29-97

354 of I.P.C. [State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Babulal, A.I.R. 1960

M.P. 155].

14. The medical evidence in the present case do not indicate as

to whether the accused has tried to force his penis inside the private

part of the girl but could not succeed. Evidence of PW-2 Parvati

Yadav before the Court, in para-3 of her deposition, indicate that

when she went there (in the house of the accused), she found Ujwala

sleeping on the floor and the accused was lying on her. Nothing

appears to have been stated beyond this by Parvati except that nicker

which was removed was brought back by her along with grand-

daughter to her house.

15. Under these circumstances, it must be held that the offence

committed by the accused did not amount to attempt to commit rape

punishable under Section 376 read with Section 511 of I.P.C., but,

was one under Section 354 of I.P.C.. Therefore, the appeal has been

partly allowed by convicting the appellant/accused for minor offence

under Section 354 of I.P.C..

16. The next question is about the sentence to be imposed for the

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 16:39:41 :::
11
APEAL-506-96&29-97

offence punishable under Section 354 of I.P.C.. Section 354 of I.P.C.

which relates to assault or criminal force to woman with intent to

outrage her modesty is punishable with imprisonment to the extent of

two years, or with fine, or with both. When the accused removed the

nicker of the girl with a view to commit sexual intercourse, it does

amount to outrage of modesty and knowledge that her modesty was

likely to be outraged. Such an act do constitute the offence

punishable under Section 354 of I.P.C. as is committed by the accused

in the present case. Considering that the appeal is partly allowed by

reducing the penal liability of the accused to that under Section 354

of I.P.C. instead of 376 read with 511 of I.P.C., I think the lesser

sentence which has been imposed by the trial Court i.e. accused to

suffer S.I. for one year and fine of Rs.300/- in default S.I. for one

month, with further direction for his release under Section 360 of

Cr.P.C. on giving a bond of good behaviour of one year in the sum of

Rs.5000/- with a surety in the like amount, would meet the ends of

justice.

17. In the result, therefore, appeal is partly allowed. The order of

conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Additional Sessions

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 16:39:41 :::
12
APEAL-506-96&29-97

Judge, Kolhapur dated 6.7.1996 in Sessions Case No.49 of 1996

against the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 376

read with Section 511 of I.P.C. set aside and modified . Instead, the

appellant is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 354 of

I.P.C.. The impugned order regarding the conditional release and

punishment, however as directed by the trial court is maintained. R

& P be sent back to the trial Court. Both Criminal Appeal and

Criminal Revision Application are disposed of accordingly.

(A. P. BHANGALE, J.)

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 16:39:41 :::