MANOJ KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 05.06.2002 passed by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Ambikapur, Sarguja in S.T. No. 138/2000 convicting the accused/appellant under Section 376(1) of IPC and sentencing him to undergo RI for seven years.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on 7.1999 FIR (Ex. P/2) was lodged by mother of the prosecutrix namely Hirmaniya Bai PW-4 alleging in it that prosecutrix about 10 to 12 years of age is her daughter, who is unsound mind from birth. She states that approximately 4 to 5 months before lodging the FIR, accused/appellant- Manoj Kumar Singh taking advantage of unsound mind prosecutrix and committed sexually intercourse with her, as a result of which the prosecutrix became pregnant. It is also stated that when the pregnancy developed, the villagers came to know about the incident and then a Panchayat was held in the village. After enquiry by Panchayat before Kutru Bai (PW-1) and Ram Kumar Yadav (PW-2), the prosecutrix narrated the name of this accused/appellant stating that he has committed rape on her, and because of which, the FIR was lodged against this accused/appellant bearing FIR No. 40/1999 for the offence punishable under Section 376(1) of IPC. The prosecutrix was medically examined by Dr. Pratibha Jain (PW-9) vide Ex. P/6-A who found prosecutrix was unsound mind girl and her secondary sex organ has fully developed and was carrying 28 weeks pregnancy. Dr. M. K. Jain (PW-11) Radiologist examined the prosecutrix about her age (ExP/8) and he opined that her age is in between 17 to 19 years. The accused/appellant was also medically examined by Dr. O.P. Shrivastava ( PW-10) and was found to be capable of performing sexual intercourse.

(3.) So as to hold the accused/appellant guilty, the prosecution examined as many as 21 witnesses. Statement of the accused/appellant was recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in which he denied the circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution case, pleaded innocence and false implication. The trial Court has also examined one witness- Ruchanram as a court witness.