LOURDHE Vs. STATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal is filed by the appellant against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed in S.C.No.28 of 2012, dated 10.12.14 by the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahalir Court, Udagamandalam, wherein the learned trial judge sentenced the appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 10 years and imposed fine of Rs.1000/- and compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one year for the offence under section 376 of IPC and imposed fine of Rs.1000/- for the offence under section 506(ii) of IPC in default to undergo 2 months simple imprisonment.

(2.) Brief case of the prosecution:

(3.) Pw11 Inspector of Police, inspected the scene of occurrence, the house of the appellant/accused with PW 4 and one Ullian and prepared rough sketch and observation mahazar, Exhibit P4 and P19. PW11 IO went to the house of the PWs1 to 3 and seized the inner wears of the victim girl PW1 Anitha as M.O.1 & 2 under mahazar Exhibit P4. Then PW1 was taken to the Kotagiri Government Hospital through PW 10 Chandra for Medical Examination. PW6 Assistant Doctor examined PW1 and issued accident register Exhibit P8. PW5 Doctor issued her report Exhibit P7 on examining PW1 Anitha. PW 11, Inspector of Police arrested the appellant/accused Lourdhe aged about 54 years on the very same day and remanded him to judicial custody. The confession of the appellant/accused was recorded before PW4 and one Ullaian and the signature of the appellant/accused was obtained as Exhibit P5 and the confession statement is Exhibit P20. The trouser of the appellant/accused was seized in mahazar Exhibit P6 and M.O.3 was sent to the Court through form 91 under the cover mahazar Exhibit P21 and 22. The appellant/accused was sent for medical examination before PW7 Doctor and his report is Exhibit P10. On further investigation the victim girl PW 1 Anitha was examined again by the Doctor PW9 to ascertain her age as per the requisition letter issued by the Judicial Magistrate, Kotagiri through Exhibit P6. PW9 Doctor issued his report Exhibit P15 opining that the victim age would be within 15 to 16 years. After completion of the investigation, PW11 filed the final report under section 376 and 506(ii) of IPC. On committal, the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahalir Court, Udagamandalam framed two charges under section 376 and 506(ii) of IPC against the appellant/accused. The prosecution examined PWs 1 to 11 and marked Exhibits P1 to P25 and M.Os 1 to 3. The appellant/accused was questioned under section 313 of Cr.P.C. and nobody was examined on his side.