RAVI KHUTIYARE Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 8/12/2017 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC) Durg in ST No.40/2015 whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the appellant under Ss. 363 and 366 (A) of the IPC, as also under Sec. 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and sentenced him to undergo RI for 3 years, RI for 5 years and RI for 10 years, with fine amount of Rs.500.00 on each count, with usual default stipulations, respectively.

(2.) Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 1/3/2015 mother of prosecutrix (PW-1) lodged an FIR at Police Station Chhawni, District Durg stating that on the said date, at about 8.30 am, she left for the work leaving her children at home and she returned at about 2.30 pm whereupon her daughter (prosecutrix) (PW-2) informed her that she is having pain in her vagina. The mother of the prosecutrix noticed swelling on her private part and it became red. On being asked, the prosecutrix informed that the appellant took her to the dilapidated house and after laying her down on the ground, the appellant removed her underwear and thereafter committed sexual intercourse with her. The mother of the prosecutrix informed about the incident to her mother-in- law, sister-in-law as also the mother of the appellant. On the same day she lodged the FIR (Ex.-P/1) at 18.45 hours.

(3.) During investigation, Alexander Keero (PW-9) recorded the statements of witnesses. Spot map was prepared vide Ex.-P/3. Revenue Inspector S.N. Kaushik (PW-10) also prepared the map vide Ex.-P/4. The prosecutrix was medically examined by Dr. Smt. Chhaya Tiwari (PW-4), who gave her report vide Ex.-P/5. She noticed redness in the pelvic region of vagina. The hymen was fresh torn. Only tip of the finger could be inserted into vagina. During examination, it was noticed that the blood was not coming from the vagina but there was tenderness. The doctor prepared two vaginal slides from the vaginal discharge and sent the same for chemical examination. The injury was caused by hard and blunt object. The underwear of the appellant was seized vide Ex.- P/6. Dr. S.K. Agrawal (PW-6) examined the appellant and gave his report vide Ex.-P/7. According to him, the appellant was capable of performing sexual intercourse. Dr. B.N. Dewangan (PW-7) conducted the ossification test and ascertained the age of the prosecutrix as 3 to 5 years vide his report Ex.-P/9.