SANTRAM S/O JAIRAM Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 22/1/2011 passed by the XI Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), Durg in S.T. No.192/2009 convicting the accused/appellant under Sec. 376 (2) (f) IPC and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for ten years and pay fine of Rs.500.00, in default of payment of fine amount to further undergo additional R.I. for two months.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on 13/9/2009 at about 5.30 pm the accused/appellant forcibly took the prosecutrix (PW/1), aged about 10 years, behind the bushes and committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. Seeing the bicycle of the prosecutrix (PW/1) lying on the road, Ravindra Kumar (PW/3) and his wife called the prosecutrix twice by her name, then wife of PW/3 heard subdued voice of prosecutrix coming from brook, they went to the place of occurrence and found prosecutrix in naked condition. The accused/appellant was also there. The information was immediately passed on to Smt. Tai (PW/2)-mother of the prosecutrix, who after reaching the place of occurrence confirmed the incident from the prosecutrix and then F.I.R.(Ex.P/2) was lodged by her on 13/9/2009 itself. Based on this report, offence under Ss. 376 and 506 IPC was registered against the accused/appellant. On 14/9/2009 the prosecutrix was medically examined by Dr. (Smt.) Ujjwala Dewangan (PW/5) vide Ex.P/7 who opined that genital injury was caused by hard and blunt object may be by sexual intercourse. Accused/appellant was also medically examined by Dr. B.P. Tiwari (PW/9) vide Ex.P/14 who opined that the accused/appellant is capable of performing sexual intercourse. After investigation, charge sheet was filed against the accused/appellant under Ss. 376, 506 and 324 IPC, however, the trial Court has framed the charges under Ss. 376 (2) (f) and 506 (Part-II) IPC.

(3.) So as to hold the accused/appellant guilty, the prosecution examined as many as 09 witnesses. Statement of the accused/appellant was also recorded under Sec. 313 of Cr.P.C. in which he denied the circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution case, pleaded innocence and false implication.