A 63-year-old man has been sentenced to six months in jail by a Delhi court for molesting a minor girl who was his neighbour.
Metropolitan Magistrate Tyagita Singh awarded the jail term to convict Rajesh Munjal, a resident of Uttam Nagar, observing that due to the "magnitude of the offence", the benefit of probation cannot be given to him.
The court, however, suspended his sentence for 30 days and released him on bail till then for the purpose of filing an appeal against his conviction.
"Though the convict is a senior citizen and old person, however, the magnitude of offence which he has been proved to have committed is such that benefit of probation cannot be extended to convict in this case.
"However, in view of the circumstances, put forth by the convict, lenient view is taken in his favour and he is sentenced to simple imprisonment for term of six months and fine of Rs 5,000," the court said.
While allowing Munjal's plea for suspension of sentence, the magistrate made it clear that if he failed to file an appeal or if he is not granted bail by the superior court, he shall present himself before this court on the expiry of 30 days to undergo the six months sentence awarded to him.
In December of 2009, a case was registered against Munjal for molesting his neighbour's 11-year-old daughter.
After the girl's father came to know about the incident, he went to the house of the accused to confront him and also informed the police about it.
The girl had told the court that when she was playing on the roof of her house, Munjal had called her and misbehaved with her. She had said that he also tried to strip her but in the meantime, her brother came there and on seeing him, Munjal left the spot.
The girl had said she did not tell anything to her brother as she was afraid, but narrated the entire incident to her parents and the police three days after.
In his defence, Munjal had alleged that he was falsely implicated in the case by the girl's father who had taken a loan of Rs 50,000 from him and was not repaying the amount.
The court, however, refused to accept his contention saying it seemed highly improbable that any person could use his minor girl child to lodge such a "heinous case of moral turpitude" against the accused in order to escape liability of payment of loan.
