RAM SUDHIR Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 6.1.1999 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Baikunthpur, Distt. Koriya (MP) in S.T.No.290/98 convicting the accused/appellant under Sections 376(1), 506 Part-II & 346 of IPC and sentencing him to undergo RI for seven years, to pay a fine of Rs.2000/-; to undergo RI for two years, to pay a fine of Rs.500/-; and to undergo RI for two years, to pay a fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulations respectively. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on 9-7-1998 at 1 p.m. FIR (Ex.P/1) was lodged by the prosecutrix (PW-1), aged about 20 years, alleging therein that on the previous night at about 8 p.m. when she was returning to her house, which was on the first floor, from the house of her maternal uncle, which was on the ground floor, the accused/appellant forcibly took her to his house after dragging her about 100 meters and there he committed forcible sexual intercourse with her twice. At about 4 a.m. the accused/appellant left his house after locking her inside the house. When she raised alarm, her brother came from the back door of the house of the accused/appellant and then she opened the door and narrated the entire incident to her family members. Based on this FIR, offences under Sections 376, 342 & 506-B of IPC were registered against the accused/appellant. The prosecutrix was medically examined on 9.7.1998 by PW-12 Dr. Kalavati Patel vide Ex.P/IIA wherein she has mentioned that there was no external or internal injury on the person of the prosecutrix, she was habitual to sexual intercourse and there was no sign of rape on her body. On 10.7.1998 the accused/appellant was also medically examined by PW-11 Dr. A.K. Sharma vide Ex.P/15A in which he opined that the accused/appellant was capable of performing sexual intercourse. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the accused/appellant for the offence under Sections 376, 342, 506-B of IPC. However, the trial Court framed charges under Sections 346, 376(1) and 506 Part-ll of IPC against him.

(3.) So as to hold the accused/appellant guilty, the prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses. Statement of the accused/appellant was recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. in which he denied the circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution case, pleaded innocence and false implication.