KAMAL NARAYAN SARTHI Vs. STATE OF C.G.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal preferred by the appellant under Sec. 374(2) of Cr.P.C. is directed against the impugned judgment dtd. 9/5/2017, passed by the learned Fifth/ Special Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.) Durg in Special Sessions Trial No.86/2015, by which the appellant herein has been convicted for offences under Ss. 302 & 376(A) of I.P.C. and Sec. 5(l)(m)(r) & 6 of the POCSO Act and sentenced as under : <IMG>JUDGEMENT_58_LAWS(CHH)3_2025_1.jpg</IMG>

(2.) Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 22/5/2015, at 3:00 to 5:00 P.M., in a room situated at Nanda Industrial Area, Mangal Bazar, Police Station- Jamul, District Durg, the appellant herein aggravated penetrative sexual assault to the minor victim and thereafter, committed her murder by strangulation and thereby committed the aforesaid offences. On the same day i.e. 22/5/2015 at 5:15 P.M., FIR was lodged against unknown person vide Ex.P-1 by uncle of the deceased Omprakash Tiwari (PW-1). Merg Intimation was registered vide Ex.P-5, Nazari Naksha was prepared vide Ex.P-3, Inquest was conducted vide Ex.P-7 and dead body of deceased was subjected to post-mortem, which was conducted by Dr. P. Akhtar (PW-19), who proved the post-mortem report vide Ex.P-43, according to which, cause of death was stated to be asphyxia due to strangulation and as per the statement of the Doctor, death was homicidal in nature. Pursuant to memorandum statement of the appellant (Ex.P-17), his underwear & T-shirt were seized vide Ex.P-18. The chocolate rapper was seized from the spot vide Ex.P-9 and the vaginal slides of the deceased and her clothes were seized vide Ex. P-12, which were sent for chemical examination to FSL alongwith other seized articles and as per FSL report (Ex.P-42C), blood was found on the slides i.e. Article- H and human blood was found on the shirt i.e. Article-I and stains of human sperm were not found on the seized articles. After due investigation, appellant was charge-sheeted for the aforesaid offences before the jurisdictional criminal court, which was ultimately committed to the Court of Sessions for hearing and disposal in accordance with law, in which, the appellant abjured his guilt and entered into defence stating that he has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated.

(3.) In order to bring home the offence, prosecution examined as many as 19 witnesses and exhibited 43 documents and the appellant-accused in support of his defence has examined only two witness DW-1 & DW-2, but not exhibited any document.