Rajasekar vs The State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). OF 2024 [Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No(s). 5104 of 2022]

RAJASEKAR …APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

THE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE …RESPONDENT(S)

ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. The Appellant before us is aggrieved by the judgement dated 26.10.2021 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Criminal Appeal No. 176 of 2017 whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal preferred by the Appellant and confirmed the judgement dated 03.02.2017, passed by the Sessions Court--convicting the Appellant for offences u/S. 3(a) r/w Sec. 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (‘POCSO’) Act, 2012.

Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by 3. At the outset, it must be noted that vide order dated SONIA BHASIN

12.07.2022, this Court issued notice only on the quantum of Date: 2024.02.09 16:55:01 IST Reason:

SLP(Crl.) No. 5104 of 2022 Page 1 of 3 sentence awarded to the Appellant. Therefore, only that limited question is required to be considered by this Court.

4. Vide the judgement of the Sessions Court, the Appellant was sentenced to undergo ten years RI along with a fine of INR 5,000 with a default clause to undergo SI for three months. The State Government was also directed to pay INR 1,00,000 to the victim as compensation under Rule 7(2) of the POCSO Rules, 2012. The sentence imposed by the Sessions Court was confirmed by the High Court without any modification.

5. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that at the time of conviction, the minimum sentence prescribed u/Sec. 4 of the POCSO Act was seven years and as on date, the Appellant has already served more than seven years of his sentence. It is also submitted that the Appellant is providing for the day-to-day expenses of the victim and her child and therefore, further imprisonment will impact not only his family but also the victim’s. On these grounds, Learned Counsel presses for leniency.

6. Having heard the Learned Counsel for the parties and considering the totality of the circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the ends of justice would be met if the period of imprisonment awarded against the Appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by him. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. The conviction of the Appellant u/s. u/S. 3(a) r/w

SLP(Crl.) No. 5104 of 2022 Page 2 of 3 Sec. 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012 is hereby confirmed. However, the sentence imposed by the Sessions Court and confirmed by the High Court is hereby modified and reduced to the period already undergone by the Appellant.

7. The Appellant be set at liberty forthwith in case he is not required in any other case.

8. With the aforesaid, the appeal stands disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

……………………………………J. (VIKRAM NATH)

……………………………………J. (SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA)

NEW DELHI FEBRUARY 05, 2024

SLP(Crl.) No. 5104 of 2022 Page 3 of 3