STATE OF C G Vs. DIPAK KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against judgment dated 24-7-2003 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Baloda Bazar in Sessions Trial No. 492/2002. By the impugned judgment, accused/respondent No. 1- Dipak Kumar has been acquitted of the charges framed against him under Sections 342, 376 (1) and 506, IPC and accused/respondent No. 2- Kiran Bai has been acquitted of the charges framed against her under Sections 342, 376 (1) read with Section 109, 376 (1) read with Section 114, IPC. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is as under:-

(2.) Shri Akhil Mishra, learned Deputy Government Advocate for the appellant/State argued that on the date of incident age of the prosecutrix was below 16 years. He further argued that the prosecutrix (P.W. 7) was a reliable witness. He further argued that the finding recorded by the Trial Court is perverse. Learned Trial Judge fell into error while not relying the testimony of the prosecutrix. It was proved that respondent-Dipak Kumar had committed forcible sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix. The acquittal vitiates and the respondents should be punished accordingly.

(3.) On the other hand. Shri Vivek Rathore. learned Counsel for the respondents opposed the above arguments and supported the impugned judgment of acquittal recorded by the learned Trial Court.