PREM CHAND Vs. STATE OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has been convicted under sections 451 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code vide judgment dated 22nd October, 1983. By a separate order of the same date he has been awarded rigorous imprisonment for three years and a fine of Rs.500.00 under section 376 of the Code. He has also been awarded rigorous imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs.500.00 for the offence under section 451, Indian. Penal Code. The sentences have, however, been directed to run concurrently. The appellant challenges the correctness of the Judgment as well as of the order sentencing him by this appeal which he had submitted to this Court through jail.

(2.) Shri. B. P Aggarwal, Advocate of this Court, was appointed amicus curiae. On an application made by him, the sentence imposed on the appellant was suspended till the disposal of the appeal on the appellantTs furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.500.00 with one surety of the like amount.' However, Shri Aggarwal did not appear at the time of bearing of the appeal. With the assistance of Shri G. S. Sharma, learned counsel for the State, I have gone through the record.

(3.) The case of the appellant in his statement under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in a nutshell, was that he had gone to the room of the prosecutrix on her asking He denied having committed sexual intercourse as alleged. In cross-examination of the prosecutrix Smt. Jayanti Jaina (P.W. 3) the suggestion put to her was that the intercourse- was with her consent. She had raised an alarm because some one had seen the occurrence. Likewise to her husband, Sudershan Jaina (P. W.4) the suggestion made was that the intercourse committed on 11th June, 1987, at about. I a.m. was with his consent.