STATE OF CHHATISHGARH Vs. DEEPAK KUMAR SAHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a reference made u/s 318 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Balod, Distt. Durg (C.G) in Sessions Trial No. 163/2006 (State v. Deepak Kumar Sahu) wherein the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, passed a judgment and order of conviction against the accused holding him guilty of an offence punishable u/s 376(2)(f) of I.P.C.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that on 3-2-2006 at about 6 p.m. the accused took the prosecutrix, Ku. Bineshwari (P.W.3), a girl aged about 8 years, in a Kotha, where the cattle straw is kept, and committed sexual intercourse against her. The said incident was witnessed by Gasobai @ Yogeshwari (P.W. 2) who reached to the spot, on hearing cries of the girl and saw that the accused was lying on the girl and was committing sexual intercourse. After seeing Gasobai the accused ran away from the spot. Gasobai reported the matter to the mother of the prosecutrix namely Kiran Bai (P. W.4) and ultimately a report was lodged to the police. The girl was medically examined by Dr. Vinita (P.W.6) on 04.2.2006 who found that the there were 12 teeth in the upper jaw and 12 teeth in lower jaw. The girl was of the weight of 18 Kgs., and auxiliary and pubic hair were not developed. Secondary sexual characters were also not developed. She was a girl of normal mental condition. There were multiple small scratch abrasions, reddish in colour over lower 2/3 portion of both legs (Anterior part). On the local examination, she found redness and inflammation present over the external genetilia and vagina. The urethra was also inflamed. The hymen was deep seated and was not ruptured. However, there were no injuries over cheek, breast, hip or thigh. She gave her opinion that the victim was sexually not matured and there were signs of recent vaginal penetration.

(3.) The charge-sheet was filed and the matter was committed to the Court of sessions and the Sessions Judge framed charges u/s 376(2)(f) IPC, to which the accused denied and a plea of the accused was recorded accordingly after taking his signature over the charges framed. On the evidence, the prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses. Thereafter, the matter was fixed for examination of the accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C., but the examination could not be conducted on account of the accused being deaf and dumb, therefore, without recording the accused statement, the Addl. Sessions Judge, fixed the matter for arguments and after hearing the final arguments, he passed the judgment holding the accused guilty of the offence punishable u/s 376(2)(f) of IPC and referred the matter to this Court u/s 318 Cr. P.C., for passing an appropriate order.