An army personnel was today sent to jail for a year for molesting and sexually harassing a woman in a drunken state by a Delhi court, which observed that he did not deserve any leniency as his duty being an armyman was to protect and not be the perpetrator.
Special Judge Hemani Malhotra awarded the jail term to T Manikadan, a resident of Delhi Cantonment, while allowing the appeal of Delhi Police against his acquittal by a trial court.
"Considering the nature of offence, coupled with the fact that convict being in Indian Army was to protect and instead turned into a perpetrator, he does not deserve any leniency.
"However, interest of justice shall be met with if he is sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for the period of one year and a fine of Rs 5000...," the court said.
"It stands firmly established that respondent T Manikadam had outraged the modesty and sexually harassed the complainant," the court said.
According to the police, the incident took place on the night of February 22, 2013 when the woman was going towards New Delhi Railway Station after finishing her work at office.
When she reached near Paharganj bridge, Manikadan, who seemed to be in drunken state, came from the front side and molested her, it said, adding that the woman raised an alarm and the man was caught by passersby and handed over to police.
The man, in his defence, had claimed he was falsely implicated by the woman. He alleged that when he was returning after withdrawing money from ATM, the woman caught him from behind, stating that he had assaulted her.
The court, however, said his argument was contradictory.
It said the woman remained consistent regarding the incident and there was no reason to doubt about her testimony as she had no previous enmity with the man.
"Her testimony regarding the man being drunk at the time of the incident is supported by his MLC which mentions the fact that he was smelling of alcohol when he was medically examined on the date of the incident," the judge said.
The man sought leniency in sentence saying he is serving in Indian Army and is the sole bread earner in his family comprising old parents, wife and two children.
Public prosecutor Atul Shrivastava had sought maximum punishment for the convict saying he did not deserve any leniency.
