Taking a lenient view towards a convict who was awarded two years jail in a molestation case, a sessions court has sentenced him till the rising of the court, observing that sending him to prison will ruin his family and future.
Additional Sessions Judge Vidya Prakash unheld the conviction of Mohd Zakir by a magisterial court for hurling abuses and misbehaving with a woman, but handed down the nominal sentence saying he should be given an opportunity to reform himself and join the mainstream.
Under the sentence "till the rising of court", the convict is detained in the the court room till it concludes proceedings for the day.
"Under facts and circumstances, court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by sending the appellant (Zakir) to jail as in such an eventuality, their entire family would be ruined and their future career would be jeopardised.
"Moreover, the court is also of the view that he should be given an opportunity to reform himself and to join mainstream of the society," the judge said.
The court, which upheld his conviction, also imposed a fine of Rs 7,000 on him, with a direction that out of the total amount, Rs 6,500 be released to the victim.
Zakir, a Delhi resident, had challenged his conviction and sentence order of the magisterial court in the March 2011 case.
In his appeal, he had contended that police arrayed no independent witness in the case and charges against him could not be proved.
He had also sought lenient view towards him on the ground that he is the sole bread earner of his family and was falsely implicated in the case.
The sessions court, however, did not set aside his conviction and relied on the testimony of the victim that Zakir used to follow her on her way to office and back home, abuse her and on one occasion held her hand and misbehaved.
The judge rejected his contention regarding absence of any independent witness, saying, "I do not find any merit in the contention that in the absence of independent corroboration to testimony of the victim, conviction cannot be recorded against accused.
"It is well settled law that it is the quality of evidence which is relevant and not quantity."
It also said that Zakir could not prove why he would be falsely implicated by the victim.
"This court does not find any illegality or infirmity or impropriety in the impugned judgement of conviction handed upon the appellant who has been rightly convicted in respect of offence punishable under section 354 (molestation) of IPC," the court said.
