RAMESHA Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant has challenged his conviction and sentence for the offence punishable under Sections 376 and 506B IPC on a trial held by the Sessions Judge, Tumkur.

(2.) THE facts reveal that the prosecutrix (PW1) was the student of 1st year BA and on the date of incident, she returned from the college and at about 6.15 p.m., she was returning to her house with the cattle and near the stream of said village, it is alleged that the appellant dragged her and committed forcible sexual intercourse, despite her resistance. He threatened her not to disclose this incident to anybody. Because of the fear created by the accused, she was under the depression and ultimately on 21.04.2012, after a lapse of 38 days, she filed a complaint with the police at the instance of her parents. Crime No. 125/2011 was registered, investigation was taken up. The spot mahazar was held as per Ex. P2 in the presence of attesting witness. The victim was examined by the doctor and the report (Ex. P3) was obtained. After collecting all the other relevant documents, the chargesheet was laid against the appellant for the aforesaid charges.

(3.) IT is the contention of learned Counsel for the appellant that there was consent on the part of victim for the sexual intercourse and there is no rape committed on the victim. It is also his submission that victim has married another person and she is now leading happy life. Anyhow, though the appellant has got many documents to prove that there was love affair between himself and the victim, he submits that in case if the matter is remitted, the victim has to be kept present before the Court again and if these documents are contradicted in the course of her evidence, her life may spoil. It is also his submission that there are mitigating circumstances to reduce the sentence to minimum, therefore, he submits that instead of remitting the matter back to the Trial Court, a lenient view may be taken by reducing the sentence to the minimum.