MANISH PHARTIYAL Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT Criminal Appeal arises out of a judgment and order dated 10.11.2008 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, District Pithoragarh in Sessions Trial No. 26 of 2006 convicting the present appellant under Section 376(1) IPC and thereby sentencing him for 7 years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5000/ -.

(2.) AT the outset, it needs to be mentioned here that the present matter pertains to Section 376 of the I.P.C. By an amendment in the IPC, Section 228A has been inserted vide Act No. 43 of 1983, in order that the identity of the victim of the offence under Section 376 I.P.C. may not be disclosed. Although, printing and publication in law general is not included in the definition of printing and publication in the above provision for which there are several pronouncements by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, yet, purely for reasons of abundant precaution, the name of the victim has not been mentioned in the present judgment and the victim is only addressed as "prosecutrix".

(3.) AS per the prosecution and other entries in the general diary, the accused was arrested at 10.30 P.M. the same day from the residence of one Akhtar Ali (PW 3), who is the owner of the truck. The clothes which the accused was wearing were taken away by the police. A recovery memo was pre; pared and the clothes were sent for further forensic examination at the forensic laboratory at Agra, Uttar Pradesh. Similarly, the clothes of the girl were also sent for the forensic examination.