MANNURAM VERMA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 11.5.2001 passed in Special Sessions Trial No.39 of 2000 by the Special Judge under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (henceforth 'the Act of 1989'), Raipur convicting the accused/Appellant under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- with default stipulation.

(2.) Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 2.7.2000 at about 10:30 a.m. First Information Report (Ex.P1) was lodged by the prosecutrix (PW1), a married lady aged about 27 years, alleging that on 1.7.2000 at about 5:00-6:00 p.m., she along with her friend Ku. Khelanbai (PW2) had gone towards the Nala (drain) for latrine. When they were sitting there for latrine, the accused/Appellant along with other person, namely, Gautram came there. Gautram forcibly raped Khelanbai (PW2) and the accused forcefully caught the prosecutrix and took her away to some distance and caused her to fall down in the Nala (drain) and forcibly raped her. During the commission of rape, the prosecutrix screamed and asked why the accused was committing wrong with her. Having heard the shout, Jagatram (PW3), Sadanand (not examined by the prosecution) and Manoj (PW4) came there. Then the accused left the prosecutrix and ran away from there. Thereafter, a report was lodged, based on which offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(xii) of the Act of 1989 was registered against the accused. The prosecutrix was medically examined by Dr. Sarla Jaiswal (PW11), who gave her report (Ex.P9A). After completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(xii) of the Act of 1989 followed by framing of charges under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1989.

(3.) So as to hold the accused guilty, the prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses in support of its case. Statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was also recorded in which he denied the charges levelled against him, pleaded his innocence and false implication in the case.