LAWS(CHH)-2012-6-58

PHAGU RAM Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Decided On June 22, 2012
Phagu Ram Appellant
V/S
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the judgment and order dated 23.4.1997 passed by Sessions Judge, Raipur in Sessions Trial No. 419/1995 convicting the accused/appellant under Section 376/ 511 IPC and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and pay fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Facts of the case in brief are that on 4.7.1995 at about 9.45 p.m. FIR Ex. P-1 was lodged by Laxmi Bai (PW-1)-mother of the minor prosecutrix aged about two and a half years at the relevant time, (not examined) alleging that on that day at about 11 a.m. she had gone to grocery shop leaving her daughter (prosecutrix) in the house playing where the accused/appellant who happened to be the son of her landlord was also sleeping. She has further alleged that when she returned from the shop, her daughter (prosecutrix) was weeping and on being asked she took out her underwear. On examination by her, apart from dried up semen-like white substance, she found redness and swelling in the private part of her daughter and after being asked as what had happened to her, she told her that accused/appellant had tried to commit forcible sexual intercourse after making her lie on the cot. Based on this FIR, offence under Section 376/ 511 IPC was registered against the accused/appellant, prosecutrix was medically examined on that day itself by Dr. Mira Baghel (PW-8) and her report is Ex. P-7. After completion of investigation, challan was filed by the police on 26.7.1995 for the said offence.

(2.) In support of its case, prosecution has examined as many as 11 witnesses. Statement of the accused/appellant was also recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which he denied the allegation made against him and pleaded his innocence and false implication in the case.

(3.) After hearing the parties, the Court below has convicted and sentenced the accused/appellant as mentioned in paragraph No. 1 of this judgment.