HIRA SAI NAGESIYA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the judgment dated 26.03.1998, passed by the IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Ambikapur, in Sessions Trial No. 394/96, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 450 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years and fine of Rs. 100/- and further for offence under Section 376 of I.P.C., the appellant has been convicted and sentenced to under go R.I. for 7 years and fine of Rs. 100/- and in default of payment of fine, additional R.I. for 3 months for each count was awarded. The briefly stated facts of the prosecution was that the prosecutrix (RW.-1) was a resident of village - Rehda, Kadampara and was a student of Class-8th. On the date of incident, her father had went out of the village. The date of incident was stated to be 12.09.1996. It was further case of the prosecution that on 08.09.1996, the mother of the prosecutrix had also went to the Ambikapur in order to get herself treated. At the time of incident, the prosecutrix was with her elder brother Rakesh Singh and farm labour Dhurwa Prasad. It was further stated that on 12.09.1996, the brother of the prosecutrix Rakesh Singh had went to her maternal grand mother (Nam) and the prosecutrix while in her house was busy in cooking at 9.00 o'clock, at that time in their house, the farm labour Dhurwa Prasad was present. It was the case of the prosecution that while the prosecutrix was alongwith Dhurwa Prasad, the appellant accused forcefully entered into the house of the prosecutrix, who was drunk and caused assault to Dhurwa Prasad and forced him to flee the house and thereafter caught hold up the prosecutrix and took her into the kitchen. Thereafter, the appellant committed rape on her and left the house. It was the case of the prosecution that on the same date, the brother of the prosecutrix did not return and Dhurwa Prasad also to whom the accused had forced to leave the house did not return. On the next date, when the brother of the prosecutrix came back, the incident was narrated him and thereafter, it was disclosed to mother of the prosecutrix in the afternoon when her mother came back from Ambikapur. It was also the case of the prosecution that thereafter, the brother of the prosecutrix Rakesh Singh in order to take revenge committed assault on the appellant who subsequently became insane and ultimately died on 15.09.1996. Thereafter, the grand mother of the prosecutrix had also died and as such for these reasons F.I.R. was lodged by delay on 16.10.1996.

(2.) After the report was made, the police had investigated the offence and the prosecutrix was subjected to medical examination, thereafter, with respect to the age of the prosecutrix, the documents were obtained and subsequently, the appellant was arrested and the charge sheet was filed. During the course of trial, the prosecution on their behalf has examined as many as 6 witnesses namely Ku. Reeta (P.W.-1), Umadevi (P.W.-2), Dr. T. Sai (P.W.-3), Havidan Toppo (P.W.4), Dr. J. Kujur (P.W.-5) and R.K. Mishra, the Investigation Officer as (P.W.-6). The defence on their behalf had examined Kariya Ram (D.W.-1), Sumitra (D.W.-2) and Prem Sai (D.W.-3).

(3.) The learned Court below after evaluating the evidence on record had convicted the appellant under the aforementioned sections. Hence this appeal.