NEWLA @ NEWAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE second Additional Sessions Judge, Dehradun on the basis of testi­mony of P W. 1 Mona (prosecutrix) and her mother P' W. 2, Sumitra Devi re­corded e finding of conviction for the offence punishable under Section 376 I. P C. against the appellant accused for having committed rape on the prosecutrx, P W. 1 Mona on 10.4.2000 at about 11 p.m. in his own house. The conviction and sentence has been chal­lenged by the appellant mainly on the ground that the appellant has been falsely implicated out of grievance or vengeance and secondly story as set up by the prosecution was improbable.

(2.) HAVING regard to the points as raised, we have examined the testimony of two witnesses, namely, PW 1 Mona and P W 2 Sumitra Devi and the record.

(3.) WITH the assistance of learned counsel, we have examined the testi­mony of doctor as well as medical report which is marked as Ex. Ka. 2 and supplementary report Ex. Ka. 3 with X-ray report Ex. Ka. 4. The medical, evidence has disclosed that there had been a lac­eration on vagina: which was in the process of healing. It is particularly: reported that hymen was torn. The medical evi­dence render corroboration to the testi­mony of P W. 1 Mona and P W. 2 Sumitra Devi `coupled with Ex. Ka. 1 which is first information report. The prosecution thus substantiated the charge beyond spell of doubt.