LAMBODAR ALIAS PARMESHWAR CHANDRA Vs. STATE OF CHHATISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29-6-2002 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Sakti, in Sessions Trial No. 5/2001. whereby the learned A. S. J., after holding the appellant guilty of the offence punishable under Ss. 363, 366 and 376(2)(0, I. P. C. sentenced him to undergo R. I. for 3 years and fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo R. I. for 3 months; R. I. for 5 years and fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo R. I. for 6 months and R. I. for 10 years and fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo R. I. for one year respectively, with an order to run the sentences concurrently.

(2.) The brief facts are that on 3-3-2000 at about 15.30 hrs., Ku. Ranu Chandra, a minor girl aged about 10 years, was returning to her house after answering the call of nature. On the way, the appellant met her and gave her some sweets and thereafter on the pretext that he will get her learn t to run the bicycle, took her to his house and after closing the doors of the house got her laid down on the cot and thereafter committed sexual intercourse against her. The father of the prosecutrix namely Jeetmani (P. W. 2) had seen that the appellant is taking his daughter, therefore, on suspicion; he went to the house of the appellant. On his call, the appellant opened the door and on being asked about the prosecutrix, he told that the prosecutrix is not there. However, the prosecutrLx came out from the house of the appellant and the father notic ed that some semen like stains were there o n the frock of the prosecutrix and the prose cutrix herself told him that the appellant has committed sexual intercourse against her. The father took the prosecutrix to the house and the narrated the story to the grand father namely Ratiram (P. W. 6) and thereafter a report was lodged in the Police Station at about 17.45 hours vide Crime No. 29/ 2000. The prosecutrix was sent for medical examination, her frock and underwear were seized and were sent for chemical examination and after completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed in the Cou rt of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sak a, who registered criminal case No. 519/2000 and committed the same to the Court of Sessions on 22-10- 2000, from where, it was received on transfer by the Addl. Session s Judge, Sakti, who conducted the trial.

(3.) The learned Sessions Judge, framed charges under Ss. 450, 363, 366 and 376(2)(f), I. P. C. and after completion of the trial, acquitted the appellant under S. 450 while convicting him under the aforementioned sections of I. P. C. The conviction is based upon the testimony of the prosecu- trix Ranu Chandra (P. W. 1), her father Jeetmani (P. W. 2) supported by the evidence of doctor Ku. S. Kachhap (P. W. 4), who examined the prosecutrix, and Dr. P. R. Dewangan (P. W. 3) who examined the appellant and also the grand father Rati Ram (P. W. 6).