DINESH SAHU Vs. STATE OF C.G.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 16.12.2000 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sakti, Distt. Bilaspur in S.T.No.2142000 convicting the accusedappellant under Sections 376 and 450 of IPC and sentencing him to undergo RI for 7 years, pay a fine of Rs.5000 and RI for 5 years, pay a fine of Rs.3000 with default stipulations respectively.

(2.) As per prosecution case, on 7.7.1999 FIR (Ex.P3) was lodged by prosecutrix (PW2), aged about 19 years, alleging therein that on 29.6.1999 at about 10 pm she was sleeping along with her neighbour PW7 Umabai, aged about 14 years and sister PW13 Khemlata, aged about 13 years, her grandmother was sleeping in the verandah and her parents had gone to another village. At that time, the appellant entered her house, upturned her clothes and after gagging her mouth committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. After commission of the offence while the appellant was moving away she raised her cries and upon hearing her cries her sisters woke up and saw the appellant running away from the place of occurrence. She stated that after return of her parents she narrated the incident to them and thereafter, report was lodged. Based on this report, offence under Sections 376 and 450 of IPC was registered against the appellant. The prosecutrix was medically examined on 7.7.1999 vide Ex.P2 by PW1 Dr .Smt. SD Kanwar who found that secondary sexual characters were well developed, one abrasion at the angle of left mandible with crust present, multiple interrupted abrasions on back and buttock side, hymen old torn and healed and vaginal orifice admitted one finger with pain. However, he expressed his inability to give definite opinion regarding the time of commission of rape and advised for referring the prosecutrix for age determination to radiologist. After investigation charge sheet was filed and the trial Court framed charges under Sections 450 and 376 of IPC against the appellant.

(3.) So as to hold the accusedappellant guilty, the prosecution examined as many as 17 witnesses. Statement of the accusedappellant was also recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. in which he denied the circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution case, pleaded innocence and false implication.