BHANU PRATAP SINGH THAKUR Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.11.2001 passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur in Sessions Trial No. 195/2001, convicting the appellant for the offences punishable under section 363, 366 and 376(1) of IPC and sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment of 4 years, 5 years and 7 years respectively and in addition, fine of Rs. 500/-, 500/- and Rs. 1000/- respectively. In default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 1 month, 1 month and 2 months respectively.

(2.) THE facts, in brief, are that on 29.01.2001, in the evening at about 8 p.m, it is alleged that the appellant kidnapped the prosecutrix Dhanmati Yadav (PW/1) and raped her. It was also alleged after that on giving assurance of marriage, the appellant committed rape upon the prosecutrix for three nights.

(3.) SO far as conviction of the appellant under sections 363 and 366(A) of the IPC is concerned, counsel for the appellant has confined his argument only to the question of quantum of sentence. So far as offence under section 376 IPC is concerned, counsel for the appellant has contended that the prosecutrix was above 16 years of age on the date of incident and she was a consenting party, therefore, offence under section 376 IPC is not made out. He has further contended that as per the provisions of section 35 of the Evidence Act, 1872, a copy of the entries of the school register, though relevant and admissible for the purpose of the age of the prosecutrix, has no evidentiary value in the absence of the fact as to on whose information the date of birth was recorded in the school register.