MEHARDEEN @ SANNA @ SAMEER Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CONVICT Mehardeen is the appellant before this Court challenging the judgment and order dated 27.5.2012, from jail, whereby he was found guilty for the offence of section 376(2)(f) of Indian Penal Code, as it stood before the amendment by Act No.13 of 2013. He was further convicted for the offence of section 366(A) IPC. For both the offences, he has appropriately been sentenced.

(2.) ALLEGATIONS against the appellant is that he had taken away Km. Manisha aged about 7 -8 years from the lawful guardianship of her father, and raped her beastly throughout the intervening night of 3/4.12.2011. Appellant was a co -worker with the father of prosecutrix Rajesh and used to reside in his close neighbourhood. The informant/father returned to his house in the evening of 3.12.2011 and sent his daughter/ victim to purchase some groundnuts at about 7 -8 PM. But she did not return even after one hour. Then informant along with near ones began to make a search of victim but could not find her anywhere. Next day in the morning of 4.12.2011, she was seen coming from a fair distance on public road. She had kept hands on her stomach and was bending forward her body at the same time. The unfortunate father lifted her ravished minor daughter in his lap and enquired. She disclosed the entire tale how she was induced by accused Samir to take away from the house. Blood was oozing out from her genitals. The father/informant Rajesh took her to the police station first to lodge the report which could be lodged at 8:40 AM of the same day. Chick report is Ex.Ka -7. Prosecutrix was then sent to the government hospital with two lady constables and PW1 Dr. Sujata Singh examined her there.

(3.) PW 1 found that the victim though conscious but was suffering with intense fever inasmuch as to 1030 Fahrenheit. She was not in a position to stand on her legs, so the doctor could not measure her height and weight. It was also found that her pubic and axillary hairs were not present; no injury was noticed on visible parts of her body but in the internal examination, it was found that the vaginal area was under superficial perinneal tear, 1.5 cm long extending posteriorly; laceration about 2 cm long on right side of urethra; slight oozing from the margins and Hymen was also found torn.