RADHA DUBEY Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been preferred by the Appellant assailing the judgment dtd. 30/1/2001 passed by the Special Judge (Atrocities), Bilaspur in Special Case No. 31 of 2000, convicting the Appellant for the offence punishable under Sec. 376(2)(g) of IPC and sentencing her to undergo R.I. for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.500.00 with default sentence of R.I. for 3 months.

(2.) Case of the prosecution in brief is that the Appellant along with her husband, Mannu Dubey, had engaged the Prosecutrix (PW-6) for household job with the consent and permission of the parents of the Prosecutrix. It is alleged that subsequent to the Prosecutrix been taken to the house of the Appellant, they forced her to go into prostitution forcing her to have physical relationships with the persons who used to visit the house of the Appellant seeking physical favour. An FIR in this regard was lodged on 31/3/2000 by the Prosecutrix herself. It is pertinent at this juncture to mention that in the FIR offence was registered against the Appellant and her husband, Mannu Dubey, and two other accused persons. However, subsequently, the name of the co-accused Dinesh Kumar also came up. The matter was put to trial before the Special Court (Atrocities) where the case was registered as Special Case No. 31 of 2000 against the Appellant, her husband Mannu Dubey and another accused Dinesh Kumar.

(3.) During the trial, the prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses and no witnesses were examined on behalf of the defence. After the conclusion of the trial, the Court below reached to the conclusion that the prosecution has not been able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt so as to the charge which was levelled against the two co-accused persons, Mannu Dubey and Dinesh Kumar, and therefore acquitted them of the charge under Ss. 342, 34, 376(2)(g), 109 of IPC and Ss. 3(2)(v) and 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. However, the Court below reached to the conclusion that so as to the charge against the Appellant is concerned the case stands proved so far as the offence under Sec. 376(2)(g) of IPC is concerned with the aid of Sec. 109 of IPC, and accordingly acquitting her of the charges under Ss. 342 of IPC and Ss. 3(2)(v) and 3(1)(xi) of the Atrocities Act, however convicted her for the offence under Sec. 376(2(g) of IPC to undergo R.I. for 10 years with fine, leading to the filing of the present appeal.