NARESH KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT has been convicted for the offences under Sections 363 and 376 IPC by the judgment impugned in this Appeal. He has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of seven years with fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine to face simple imprisonment for four months for the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC; rigorous imprisonment for three years with fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to face simple imprisonment for two months for the offence punishable under Section 363 IPC. Both the sentences have been directed to run concurrently. Benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C. has also been granted to the appellant.

(2.) IN brief, prosecution story as unfolded is that the appellant took away with him the prosecutrix aged 14 years on 22nd July, 2008, after enticing her, to Bihar and had sexual intercourse with her against her wishes till 28th July, 2008 when he and the prosecutrix were recovered from a hotel by the officials of Police Station Roshra District, Samastipur, Bihar. During this period appellant even tried to marry the prosecutrix and had taken her to court for this purposes but their marriage could not be registered.

(3.) SINCE this court has come to the conclusion that the prosecutrix was a consenting party, the age of prosecutrix assumes great importance. Section 375 IPC defines "Rape". Clause sixthly of Section 375 IPC envisages that if a man has sexual intercourse with a woman with or without her consent when she is under 16 years of age, would amount to "rape". Thus, now it has to be seen as to whether, as on the date of commission of crime, prosecutrix was less than 16 years of age before it can be held that the Appellant is guilty of committing offence of rape.