SUMIL MINJ Vs. STATE OF M. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of judgment of conviction and sentence dtd. 9/9/2000 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Ambikapur, District Surguja in S.T. No.245/99 thereby convicted accused/appellant under Ss. 363, 366, 342 & 376 (1) of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the IPC') and sentenced him to undergo RI for 03 years; RI for 03 years, RI for 06 months and RI for 06 years and fine of Rs.200.00, in default to undergo additional RI for 01 year, respectively. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 6/6/1999 when the prosecutrix along with her friends Hiramani (PW-2) and Virjita (PW-3) was returning her home from Kanki village market. On the way, appellant came on bicycle and caught hold of hand of prosecutrix near an agriculture field in between Kakni & Gangoli and started dragging her from her hairs. When PW-2 & PW-3 asked him not to do so, he threatened them due to which they fled from there. Thereafter, appellant forcibly took the prosecutrix with him to village Chitpur and kept her whole night in the house of one Bokhibai. Next morning appellant took the prosecutrix to his village where he kept her for two days and during this period, he committed sexual intercourse with her saying that he will keep her as his wife. Father of prosecutrix came to house of appellant, freed her daughter from custody of appellant and thereafter prosecutrix lodged report of incident on 10/6/99. Based on aforementioned report, police registered crime for offence defined under Ss. 363, 366, 342 and 376 of IPC against appellant.

(3.) After completion of investigation, police filed charge sheet before the Court of competent jurisdiction. The trial Court framed charges under Ss. 363, 366, 342, 376 (1) of IPC against appellant. So as to hold appellant guilty, prosecution examined 12 witness in all and exhibited 13 documents in all. Statement of accused/appellant was recorded under Sec. 313 of Cr.P.C. in which he denied the circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution case and pleaded innocence & false implication. He examined one witness namely Bishu Dev (DW-1) in his defence.