LAWS(MAD)-2009-7-150

MOHAMED ALI Vs. STATE

Decided On July 15, 2009
MOHAMED ALI Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPEAL filed under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. against the Judgment and conviction passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court) Vellore in S.C.No,268 of 2000 dated 29.10.2003 convicting the appellant under Section 376 (2)(f) read with 511 I.P.C. to undergo 3 years R.I. And to pay a fine of Rs.5, 000/- in default to undergo R.I. for six months.)The appellant herein is the accused. The appellant/accused was convicted under Section 376(2)(f) r/w 511 I.P.C. and was sentenced to undergo three years R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to undergo six months R.I. Out of the fine amount, Rs.3,000/- was ordered to be paid to the victim as compensation. Aggrieved against the conviction and sentence, the present appeal has been filed by the accused.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on perusal of the evidence on record, the offence is not substantiated and an erroneous conclusion has been reached by the trial Court by convicting the appellant. THE occurrence alleged to have been taken place on 11.03.1995 and the complaint was given on 15.03.1995. In the meantime, on 13.03.1995, P.W.1 the father of the victim and the accused indulged in quarrel which resulting in the complaint in the same police station and for which, the accused was imposed with fine. At the time of giving complaint on 13.03.1995, no such allegation of attempt to rape was even given to the respondent police. THE victim was aged about 4 to 5 at the time of alleged occurrence. P.Ws.1 and 2, the father and mother have given evidence on the information alleged to have been divulged and narrated by the victim girl. THE victim girl was innocent and immature THE learned trial Judge convicted the accused on the basis of the evidence of the parents, who were not eyewitnesses. THE evidence of the victim girl is not corroborated with the medical evidence of P.W.8. It is further submitted that the findings given by the trial Judge is unreasonable and liable to be set aside.