SUNIL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT appeal is directed against the judgment dated 07.03.2013 of learned Additional sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 02/11 emanating from FIR No. 185/10 registered at Police Station Nand Nagari by which the appellant -Sunil @ Monu was held guilty for committing offences punishable under Sections 324/363/366/376(2) (f) IPC. By an order dated 12.03.2013, he was awarded various prison terms with fine.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the prosecution case as reflected in the charge - sheet was that on 04.09.2010 at around 7:15 p.m. after kidnapping the prosecutrix 'X' (assumed name), aged around 7 years from the lawful guardianship of her parents, the appellant committed rape upon her at his house. The incident was reported and Daily Diary (DD) No. 29A came into existence at 12.00 a.m. at Police Station Nand Nagari. The Investigation was assigned to SI Manmeet, who was on patrolling duty in the area. On reaching the spot, he came to know that the victim had already been taken to GTB hospital for medical examination by PCR officials. After recording statement of Rekha, victim's mother (PW -4/A), he lodged First Information Report. The accused was arrested and taken for medical examination. Statements of witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. 'X' recorded her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Exhibits were sent for examination to Forensic Science Laboratory. Upon completion of investigation, a charge -sheet was filed against the appellant for commission of various offences including Section 377 read with Section 511 IPC. In order to bring home the appellant's guilt, the prosecution examined 16 witnesses in all. In 313 statement, the appellant pleaded false implication and denied his involvement in the crime without producing any witness in defence. After considering the rival contentions of the parties and on appreciating the evidence on record, the Trial Court by the impugned judgment held the appellant guilty for the offences mentioned above. It is apt to note that the appellant was acquitted of the charge under Section 377 IPC read with Section 511 IPC and the State did not challenge it. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, the instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant.

(3.) THE occurrence took place on 04.09.2010 at around 7:15 p.m. The victim was taken immediately to GTB hospital where she was medically examined by MLC Ex.PW -14/A which records her arrival time at 9:30 p.m. The FIR was lodged without any delay. After recording statement of the victim's mother PW -4 (Smt. Rekha), rukka (Ex.PW -2/A) was sent at 11:45 p.m. In her statement (Ex.PW -4/A), the complainant gave detailed account as to how and under what circumstances 'X' was ravished by the appellant in his house. The appellant was specifically named in the FIR and definite role was assigned to him. Since the FIR was lodged promptly, there was least possibility of the complainant to concoct a false story in such a short period.