RAJU THAPA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal U/S 374 of Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment and order dated 22-9-2001, passed by District and Sessions Judge Bageshwar District Bageshwar in Sessions Trial No. 4 of 2011, State Vs. Raju Thapa, convicting the accused Raju Thapa U/S 376 I.P.C. and Section 67-A of The Information Technology Act, 2000 and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- U/s 376 I.P.C. and in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months R.I. and further sentencing him to undergo R.I. for two years U/S 67-A of The Information Technology Act and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months R.I. However, it is directed that the sentences shall run concurrently.

(2.) The prosecution story in brief is that on 15-12-2010, complainant Dalip Singh Khetwal lodged written report at P.S. Kotwali Bageshwar to the effect that his niece the prosecutrix aged 14 years who is studying in class 10th in Inter College Tuped, two years ago Raju Thapa a teacher of Gairad Bilkhet School had forcibly committed rape on her after given her threats and also prepared a obscene mobile clip after giving her threats to fail her in the class and due to the threats she could not tell the occurrence to any one. On 14- 12-2010, when a Nepali customer came to the shop of Darshan Khetwal, owner of Kumaun Photo Studio, in order to load picturesongs in his mobile, then it came to light that there was an obscene video-recording of Km. Reeta, who is his Bua in relation. At this Darshan informed the informant and he came to the Photo Studio and saw the obscene video recording and inquired from prosecutrix about the said video recording whereupon the prosecutrix told the informant that the incident is of two years ago, accused Raju Thapa, teacher of Bilkhet Gairad High School had prepared the video record after giving threats her to fail her in the class and to expel her from the school. The complainant also handed over the C.D. at the police station. On the basis of written report, Ext. Ka.1, chick F.I.R. Ext. Ka.5 was prepared and case crime No. 1533 of 2010 U/Ss 376/506 I.P.C. and Section 67-A, 67-B of Information Technology Act, 2000 was registered, carbon copy of registration of the case is Ext. Ka.6. The prosecutrix was medically examined by the doctor. The I.O. inspected the place of occurrence and prepared site-plan Ext. Ka.11. After completing the investigation the I.O. submitted charge sheet Ext. Ka.14 against the accused.

(3.) The C.J.M. Bageshwar committed the case to the court of Sessions.