S RAJKUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against conviction. The accused was charged for an offence u/s.376 IPC; the trial Court found him guilty; convicted and imposed a sentence of ten years RI. Against the conviction and sentence, this appeal has been filed.

(2.) The facts of the case, briefly, are as follows: On 8.11.1992 at about 12.40 pm when PW1 was talking with his friends in his house, his daughter aged about six years, the victim girl was playing outside. Then PW1 heard the noise of her daughter; he along with his friends rushed there and knocked the door; which was bolted from inside. When the door was opened, his daughter was crying naked and blood was oozing out from her genital organ; the accused was trying to put on his pants; on seeing them, the accused ran away; he was chased and caught by them; the victim told as to what had happened. The accused was taken to the police station along with the victim and a complaint/Ex.P1 was lodged. The clothes of the victim was also found blood stained. The victim, examined as PW2, has deposed that when she was playing in the house, the accused took her along with her younger brother to the adjoining house (the keys of that house were with the accused); he switched on the Television and they were watching the Television; after sometimes her brother/Sivakumar was sent out by the accused; the accused removed her clothes and committed rape on her; because of that act, blood was oozing out from her genitals; hence she cried; hearing her noise, her father/PW1 and others came there and caught the accused. PW3/Medical Officer in her evidence has stated that the genital of the victim was found swollen and it was due to forced intercourse; in Ex.P4/Certificate given by her, she has stated that the injury could have been caused by the man, as spoken to by the prosecution. Evidence of Pws.1 and 2 have been corroborated by PWs 4 to 8/neighbours; PW9/Asst. Professor of Forensic Science has deposed that the accused was potent; PW10, who has registered the complaint, has deposed that PW1 brought the accused to the police station along with the victim girl and gave the complaint; he also speaks about the investigation. PW11/Inspector of Police filed the charge sheet after completion of the i nvestigation. When questioned under S.313 Cr.PC, the accused stated that on the date of occurrence he was aged about 16; his date of birth is 1.6.1975; and, all the witnesses deposed falsely against him. All the witnesses came to his house and took him to the police station.

(3.) The trial Court found the accused guilty u/s.376 IPC. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, the present appeal has been filed.