SUDHARI @ SHIVADHARI SINGH Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 23-8-2001 delivered in Sessions Case No. 212/2001 by Shri T.P. Sharma, 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Koriya (Baikunthpur), whereby the appellant was convicted under Sections 450 and 376, IPC and was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years under Section 376, IPC and to rigorous imprisonment for three years under Section 450, IPC.

(2.) Briefly stated the prosecution story is that on 18-3-2001, the prosecutrix aged about 16 years was alone at her residence in Village Khod, Badkapara, P.S. Patna, District Koriya. Her parents, Le., Ramadhar (P.W. 2) and Moharmunia (P.W. 6) had gone to another village. It is alleged that at about 8.00 P.M. the appellant entered the house of the prosecutrix and threatening to kill her, if she shouted, pushed her on a cot and committed rape on her twice. At about 9.00 P.M., the parents of the prosecutrix returned home. Seeing them, the appellant ran away. The prosecutrix narrated the incident to her parents. FIR was lodged vide Ex. P-l on 19-3-2001 at 3.45 P.M. by prosecutrix. The school certificate showing the date of birth of the prosecutrix as 8-7-1985 Ex. P-4 was seized from the prosecutrix vide Ex. P-3. Dr. Kalawati Patel (P.W. 8) examined the prosecutrix on 19-3-2001 and found no external injury anywhere on her body. Upon internal examination, she found that the hymen had an old rupture, vagina easily admitted two fingers and the prosecutrix was menstruating. It was opined that the prosecutrixwas accustomed to sexual intercourse arid there was no evidence of rape having been committed on her. The vagina slides were prepared and handed over to the Constable, which was seized vide Ex. P-9. The Chaddi of the prosecutrix was seized vide Ex. P-2 on 23-3-2001. The underwear worn by the appellant was also seized vide Ex. P-14 on 21-3-2001. On being sent for chemical analysis, the FSL vide report Ex. P-17 confirmed that semen or human spermatozoa was not present either on the vaginal slides or on the Chaddi of the prosecutrix. However, presence of semen and human spermatozoa was confirmed on the underwear of the appellant. However, these stains were not sufficient for Serological examination. After completion of investigation, the appellant was prosecuted under Sections 450 and 376, IPC-.

(3.) The appellant abjured the guilt, pleaded innocence and led no evidence in defence. The prosecution examined as many as 8 witnesses. Relying upon the evidence led by the prosecution, the learned Trial Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned in Paragraph 1.