OMPRAKASH CHOUDHARY Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.3.2010 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), Pendra Road, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh in Sessions Trial No. 54 of 2009 whereby and whereunder the learned trial Court after holding the Appellant guilty for committing house trespass and also for committing rape against will and consent of the prosecutrix (PW-1), convicted the Appellant under Sections 450 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'the IPC') and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years, also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for one month and RI for 7 years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for one month, with a direction that both the substantive jail sentences shall run concurrently.

(2.) Conviction is impugned on the ground that without there being any iota of evidence, Learned Court below has convicted and sentenced the Appellant as aforementioned and thereby committed illegality.

(3.) As per case of the prosecution, on 12.09.2009 at about 11:30 pm, when the prosecutrix (PW-1) was sleeping in her room, the Appellant entered the room, removed clothes of the prosecutrix and committed intercourse forcibly. When the prosecutrix shouted for help, her father-inlaw, mother-in-law and sister-in-law came to the spot and they caught the Appellant. Thereafter, on 13.9.2009 at about 4:00 pm, the prosecutrix lodged an FIR in Police Station Gourella which was registered as Crime No.198 of 2009 under Sections 450 and 376 of the IPC against the Appellant. After necessary permission from the concerned authorities, the prosecutrix was examined by PW-9 Dr. Nalini Singh who noticed no external injury or internal injury and also held that the prosecutrix is a married woman and habituated to intercourse and the report of the chemical analyst may be required to prove the intercourse. She gave her report Ex. P/10. The vaginal slide was also prepared, sealed and handed over to the concerned constable and also clothes of the prosecutrix were also sent to the chemical analysis. The Investigating Officer (the IO) (PW-10) Kabir Sai prepared the spot map, seized the articles from the spot and also from the Appellant and the prosecutrix. The Appellant was arrested and he was examined by Dr. A.L. Koram (PW-8), who opined that the Appellant is capable of committing intercourse.