SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Rohit on 31 July, 2019

1
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE NO.18938 OF 2019
(SectionState of Madhya Pradesh vs Rohit)

Indore, Dated 31.07.2019
Shri Yogesh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the
applicant/State.

Submissions were made on application filed under
Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
against the order of acquittal pronounced by JMFC, Ujjain in
Criminal Case No.8540/2017 vide judgment dated 08.02.2019
acquitting the non-applicant from charges under Section 354
of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short the ‘SectionIPC’).

As per facts of the case, the prosecutrix had gone to a
Clinic where the non-applicant – Rohit on two occasions had
tried to touch inappropriately and on last occasion had caught
hold of her hand.

The JMFC, Ujjain had pronounced the order of acquittal
on the ground that the impugned act does not satisfy the
provision of Section 349 IPC which is force and Section 350
IPC which is a criminal force and, therefore, the non-applicant
has been acquitted for committing offence under Section 354
IPC.

Learned counsel for the applicant/State has pointed out
that the facts do constitute assault with an intention to outrage
her modesty.

Section 354 of IPC was perused which encompasses
assault or criminal force whereas the learned trial Court has
only considered the aspect of criminal force. The assault has
been defined in Section 351 IPC which reads as under:-

Section 351. Assault.–Whoever makes any
gesture, or any preparation intending or knowing it
2
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE NO.18938 OF 2019
(SectionState of Madhya Pradesh vs Rohit)

to be likely that such gesture or preparation will
cause any person present to apprehend that he
who makes that gesture or preparation is about to
use criminal force to that person, is said to commit
an assault.

The impugned act do prima-facie satisfies the definition
of assault and the facts constitute contradiction of Section 354
IPC, 1860. Therefore, I am inclined to allow the application filed
under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
and application for grant of leave to appeal is allowed.

Office is directed to register criminal appeal.
Let a bailable warrant in the sum of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees
Five Thousand) be issued against the non-applicant for his
appearance before the trial Court on 04.09.2019. The non-
applicant shall furnish solvent surety of Rs.5,000/-with personal
bond of the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court for his
appearance before the Registry of this Court on 25.09.2019.

Notice be issued to the non-applicant.

Trial Court’s record be requisitioned.

Be listed for consideration on the point of admission.
With the aforesaid facts, this Miscellaneous Criminal
Case No.18938 of 2019 is allowed and is disposed of.

Certified copy as per Rules.

(SHAILENDRA SHUKLA)
JUDGE
Arun/-

Digitally signed by ARUN NAIR
Date: 2019.08.01 10:15:37
+05’30’

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation