top of page



The Hon’ble Justice N.V. RAMANA and Justice AJAY RASTOGI of the Supreme Court of India pronounced the order dismissing the appeal made by the appellant.  This Criminal Appeal arises out of the cancelation of the Criminal appeal in the High court and accepting the judgment passed by the Sessions Judge, Chamoli.

The issues considered by the Hon’ble Supreme court were to whether to consider the Criminal appeal filed by the appellant though it has been dismissed in the subordinate courts?

The court by hearing the fact that the accused (appellant) had tried to molest the victim (complainant) by knowing the fact of her presence in the house alone convicted   for   offence   under Section 511 read with Section 376 IPC and was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment  for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/­.

The accused approached the High court in Criminal Appeal.  The High court dismissed the appeal.  At present, the case enters the Supreme Court and the appellant stated that

The appellant has been framed by the complainant due to some existing enmity. The prosecution has failed to explain the reason for the delay in filing the FIR The evidence given by the witness does not make the accused liable under section 511 read with section376 of I.P.C. The prosecution has to prove that the accused applied criminal force on the victim with the intention of outraging her modesty in order to attract culpability under section 354 of I.P.C.

The counsel for the state stated that the accused attempted to molest the complainant on the same day when the offense occurred. The delay was because the husband of the victim was staying in Nandprayag at the time of the incident which occurred in the village of Salna.  Then she approached the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chamoli. The accused entered the house forcibly in a drunken state is aware of the absence of her husband.  The accused exerted criminal force and pounced upon her and lifted her petticoat.  This action is sufficient to prove the culpability of the accused.

The counsel of the appellant relied upon the case of Aman Kumar and Anr. V. State of Haryana (2004) 4 SCC 379 which held that :

“In order to find an accused guilty of an attempt with intent to commit a rape, court has to be satisfied that the accused, when he laid hold of the prosecutrix, not only desired to gratify his passions upon her person, but that he intended to do so at all events, and Notwithstanding any resistance on her part.”

But the counsel on behalf of the respondent stated that the attempt to commit an offense begins when the accused commences doing an act with the necessary intention, but in the present case, the accused pounced upon the victim and attempted to perform the offense.

The involvement of an independent witness made the case in a doubtful manner but his statement of entering the case by hearing the noise around 10:00 p.m. and seeing the appellant’s wife holding his neck coming out from the house of the complainant.  He also stated that the victim complaining that the accused was quarreling with her.

The counsel on behalf of the appellant stated the case of Tarkeshwar Sahu V. State of Bihar (2006) 8 SCC 560.  But the court explained that the accused had failed at the stage of preparation of commission of the offense itself.  But here he forcibly entered the house and attempted to commit the offense.

After considering the facts and circumstances the court established the guilt of the accused without a doubt and gave an opinion that the judgment passed in the lower courts have rightly sentenced.  Therefore the Supreme Court had dismissed the appeal.

View/Download Judgment: Chaitu lal v. State of Uttarakhand




bottom of page