NAGENDRA PRASAD MISHRA Vs. STATE OF M.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 6th January, 1998 passed by Sessions Judge, Distt. Durg in S.T.No.258/90, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Sections 450 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo Rl for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.100/-, in default thereof, to undergo additional Rl for one month, on each count. Both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) CASE of the prosecution, in brief, is that the prosecutrix resided with her husband in a tenanted house of one Goswami at Village-Kohka, Bajrang Para. The appellant was also residing in another portion of the same house. On the date of incident, husband of the prosecutrix had gone to his work and the prosecutrix having taken her meals was sleeping in her house along with her infant child after bolting the door. However, the appellant somehow entered into her room at night, whereupon the prosecutrix got up and asked the appellant, how did he enter her house, on which the appellant threatened her that if she raises an alarm, he will kill her. When the prosecutrix tried to raise alarm, the appellant pressed her mouth and forcibly made her lie down on the floor and committed rape with her. During commission of rape, the appellant had bitten cheek of the prosecutrix. After committing rape, the appellant fled from there. When husband of the prosecutrix returned at night, the prosecutrix did not disclose about the incident to him due to fear. However, next day the prosecutrix, narrated the incident to the women residing in the vicinity and to her brother, who, in turn, disclosed the incident to husband of the prosecutrix. Report of the incident was lodged by the prosecutrix.

(3.) LEARNED trial Court after hearing counsel for the respective parties and considering the material available on record, by the impugned judgment convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned above.