MANSUKH ALIAS MANU DHARAMSHI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant - ori. Accused has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 29. 1. 2005 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 3, Morbi in Sessions Case No. 33/2004, whereby, the learned Judge has convicted and sentenced the appellant - accused for the offence punishable under sec. 376 of IPC to undergo R/i for 10 years and also ordered fine by way of compensation of Rs. 25000/- to be paid to the victim, in default, the same to be recovered from the property of the appellant-accused and with a fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default, to undergo further R/i for one year.

(2.) THE facts of the prosecution case are as under:

(3.) IT was contended by learned Advocate for the appellant that the judgment and order of the Sessions Court is against the provisions of law; the Sessions Court has not properly considered the evidence led by the appellant. Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that the prosecution has not proved the case against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. It is further submitted that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the age of the victim. It is stated that at the time of recording of the complaint, parents of the victim have not produced any documentary evidence to establish the birth date of the victim. Learned advocate for the appellants has submitted that victim herself has voluntarily came to the residence of the appellant and the conviction is based on the evidence of minor victim as well as minor Santosh, the brother of the victim. Both of them are interested witnesses and, therefore, they are weak piece of evidence and the prosecution has failed to prove the case against the appellant - ori. Accused.