PRAHALAD MOHANLAL SAHU Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against judgment dated 07-05-2004 passed by Sessions Judge, Durg in Sessions Trial No. 253/2003. By the impugned judgment, accused/appellant Prahalad has been convicted under Sections 450 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and to pay fine of Rs. 50/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 months and rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and to pay fine of Rs. 100/-, respectively. In default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 month and 3 months, respectively. The jail sentences are directed to run concurrently. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is as under:

(2.) Shri Ravi Kumar Bhagat, learned counsel for the appellant argued that the FIR (Ex. P-1) was lodged belatedly. The age of prosecutrix (PW-1) was above 16 years on the date of incident. The trial Court grossly erred in holding the appellant guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 450 and 376 IPC. On close scrutiny of the evidence available on record, possibility of prosecutrix (PW-1) having been consenting party cannot be ruled out. Therefore, the conviction of the appellant is not sustainable and he deserves acquittal.

(3.) On the other hand, Smt. Madhunisha Singh, learned Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent, supporting the impugned judgment, submitted that the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant do not warrant any interference by this Court.