CHANDRA SHEKHAR VERMA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 14.9.2005 passed by Special Judge (SC & ST Act), Bastar at Jagdalpur in ST No. 162/2004 convicting the appellant under Sections 376(1), 323 of Penal Code and Sec. 3(1)(12) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life, pay a fine of Rs.1000.00; RI for one year and RI for five years, pay a fine of Rs.500.00, with default stipulations respectively.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on 16.4.2004 a written report (Ex. P/6) was lodged by the prosecutrix (PW-4), aged about 19 years, alleging in it that in Nov., 2003 the accused/appellant joined her school as Karate teacher and in Dec., 2003 she had gone along with him on his motorcycle to attend one tournament at Sukuma. She has alleged that in the jungle the accused/appellant stopped his vehicle and committed sexual intercourse with her against her wishes on the pretext of marriage. Since then he continued to sexually exploit her and on 12.4.2004 he again took her along with him and she remained with him till 14.4.2004. When she asked him to marry her, he assaulted on her and after causing injuries, ousted her from his company. Based on this written report, FIR (Ex.P/5) was registered against the accused/appellant under Sec. 375(4), 493, 376, 323 of Penal Code and Sec. 3(1)(xii) and 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The prosecutrix was medically examined vide Ex.P/3 on 16.4.2004 by PW-2 Dr. Shashikala Thakur who noticed contusion, healed abrasion, small abrasion on the person of the prosecutrix as also pain over her right scapular region. She also noticed that the hymen of the prosecutrix was old torn. In her opinion, there was no evidence of recent sexual intercourse, the prosecutrix was habituated to sexual intercourse and the injuries suffered by her were simple in nature. After investigation, charge sheet was filed against the appellant and while framing charge, the trial Judge framed charges under Sections 376(1), 323 of Penal Code and Sec. 3(1)(xii) of the Act.

(3.) So as to hold the accused/appellant guilty, the prosecution examined 8 witnesses in all. Statement of the accused was also recorded under Sec. 313 of Crimial P.C. in which he denied the circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution case, pleaded innocence and false implication.