LAWS(UTN)-2019-5-168

MANIRAM Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

Decided On May 20, 2019
MANIRAM Appellant
V/S
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal, is directed against the judgment and order dtd. 10/6/2015 passed by Sessions Judge, Tehri Garhwal whereby the learned sessions Judge has convicted accused appellant under sec. 376(2)(i) IPC and under sec. 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (herein after referred as POCSO). Accused appellant is sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years along with fine of Rs.5,000.00 under sec. 376(2)(i) IPC and in regard to sec. 3/4 of POCSO Act it has been observed that as per sec. 42 of the POCSO Act, accused appellant has already been punished greater in degree i.e. under sec. 376(2)(i) IPC.

(2.) Prosecution story, in brief, is that CP Meena Tomar (P.W.1) gave a written report (Ex. A1) with P.S. New Tehri with the averments that on 27/8/2014 prosecutrix, victim of Kedarnath disaster, was sent for medical examination accompanying with complainant. It is mentioned in the written report that victim disclosed the fact that her father, mother, brother and sister had been flushed out in Kedarnath disaster, and she was rescued by army's helicopter and dropped at Haridwar District where she met a boy named Ajay, a rag picker, who brought her about four months ago to Kabadi Colony Koti New Tehri Garhwal. When the victim was inquired again by the complainant, she disclosed that in Koti accused appellant had committed wrong twice with her and threatened her of dire consequences. On the basis of said report case crime no. 31 of 2014 under sec. 376(2), 506 IPC and 5 (l)(m)/6 POCSO Act was registered against the accused/appellant. Investigation was conducted by S.I. Aishwarya Pal (P.W.7), who prepared site plan (Ex. A12), sent victim for age determination and after completion of investigation submitted charge sheet (Ex. A14) against the accused appellant.

(3.) The case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial. The trial court framed charge against the appellant under sec. 376(2) and 506 IPC and under sec. 5(l)(m) read with sec. 6 of the POCSO Act.