DILSAY Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 14.12.1998 passed by the Sessions Judge, Surguja (Ambikapur) in S.T.No.285/97 convicting the accused/appellant under Section 376(1) of IPC and sentencing him to undergo Rl for seven years, to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- and in default thereof to undergo additional imprisonment for 1 1/2 year.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on 22.8.1997 at 7.15 pm FIR (Ex.P/1) was lodged by the prosecutrix (PW-1), aged about 15 years, alleging therein that she works as agriculture labour along with her mother and father, on the previous day at about 5 pm when she was working in the field of the accused/appellant along with her mother, father, grand-mother and sister, the accused/appellant came there, caught hold of her hand, started dragging her to a nearby field and on objection being raised by her, he gagged her mouth and threatened to throw her into river. After taking her to the nearby field, the accused/appellant threw her on the field and after upturning her petticoat committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. She has stated that while she was being subjected to rape by the accused/appellant, her father reached there in search of her and after seeing him, the accused/appellant fled from the spot. Based on this FIR, offences under Sections 376 and 506-B of IPC were registered against the accused/appellant. The prosecutrix was medically examined on 23.8.1997 by Dr. Anita Shrivastava (PVV-9) vide Ex.P/18 and she found no external or internal injury on the person of the prosecutrix. As per the doctor, no definite opinion could be given regarding recent sexual intercourse. Ossification test of the prosecutrix was done by PVV-5 M.K. Jain vide Ex.P/3 according to which the prosecutrix was in between 14-16 years of age. After investigation, charge sheet was filed against the accused/appellant for the offence under Sections 376, 506-B, 364-A and 366-A of IPC. However, the trial Court framed charge under Sections 376 read with 506 Part-ll of IPC against him.

(3.) So as to hold the accused/appellant guilty, the prosecution examined as many as 9 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. In defence, he examined Vijay and Muniram as DW-1 and DW-2 respectively.