Teetu v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
This court upheld the appellant's conviction for rape but modified the sentence from life imprisonment to the period already undergone, finding the original sentence harsh. The fine was also reduced to Rs. 500/-.
What did the court decide?
Sentence reduced to period already undergone; fine reduced to Rs. 500/-; additional imprisonment for default reduced to one month.
What the court decided
[A.F.R.]
Court No. - 37
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6279 of 2010
Appellant :- Teetu Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- Govind Saran Hajela Counsel for Respondent :- Govt Advocate
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J. Hon'ble Ajai Tyagi,J.
(Oral Judgment by Hon'ble Ajai Tyagi, J.)
- By way of this appeal, the appellant-Teetu has challenged the Judgment and order 21.08.2010 passed by court of Additional Sessions Judge/FTC 3, Firozabad in Session Trial No.84 of 2010 arising out of Case Crime No.482 of 2009 under Section 376 Indian Penal Code, Police Station-Rasoolpur, District-Firozabad whereby the accused-appellant was convicted under Section 376 IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.5,000/- and in case of default of payment of fine, to undergo further imprisonment for one year.
- The brief facts as per prosecution case are that on 2.10.2009, a written report was submitted by complainant-Raju Rathore at Police Station-Rasoolpur, District-Firozabad, stating therein that in the midnight of 1/2.10.2009, his 7 years old daughter (victim) and 10 years old son Babloo were sleeping on the roof and the accused-appellant Teetu was also sleeping on the same roof while the complainant was sleeping inside the house with his wife Geeta and two other children. In the morning, when his daughter did not come down from the roof,
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 376 IPC should be upheld given the trial court's finding.
Whether the sentence of life imprisonment awarded by the trial court is excessive and requires modification based on the reformative theory of punishment.
Whether the appellant's sentence should be reduced to the period already undergone considering he has spent over 12 years in jail.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Teetu
- respondent
State of U.P.
Coram
Ajai Tyagi
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · October
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRLA/6279/2010
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court